Chandler v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
30 F. 38 · 1886
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 1936
7 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Transportation Line v. Hope · George v. Tate · Van Norden v. Morton · Bast v. Bank · Lyon v. Bertram
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Parol evidence of surrounding circumstances is admissible to show the subject-matter of the contract, when ambiguous or indefinite; but the express terms cannot be varied by proof of the negotiations and transactions out of which it grew, and the circumstances which surrounded its adoption. In construing the terms of a written contract, such evidence is allowable for the purpose of ascertaining the real Intention of the parties, hut no new obligation or duty can be imposed on a party which is not warranted by a fair and reasonable construction of the words of the instrument.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Tt is an old rulo, and well settled, that, on motion l'or a new trial, a jury would not be allowed to explain the grounds of their verdict.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McDonald v. Pless
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.