Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 350 F.2d 445 - Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co.

Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co.’s Empirical Analysis

350 F.2d 445 · 1965

Citation profile

440
cited by 440 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
34
states following
February 2024
most recently cited

45 federal appellate · 49 district · 261 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 440 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2024 · most notably Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute (1991), Cheshire Mortgage Service, Inc. v. Montes (1992)

45 federal appellate · 49 district · 261 state decisions — followed in 34 states

10201965197019801990200020102020decided

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 Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc. · Hume v. United States · Campbell Soup Co. v. Lojeski · Mandel v. Liebman

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 440 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Unconscionability has generally been recognized to include an absence of meaningful choice on the part of one of the parties together with contract terms which are unreasonably favorable to the other party.”
    78 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “such as no man in his senses and not under delusion would make on the one hand, and as no honest and fair man would accept on the other.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[if] a contract be unreasonable and unconscionable, but not void for fraud, a court of law will give to the party who sues for its breach damages, not according to its letter, but only such as he is equitably entitled to.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.