37 Wash. 2d 693 - Akers v. Sinclair’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently September 2015
16 state decisions
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 Carew, Shaw & Bernasconi, Inc. v. General Casualty Co. of America · 23 Tex. Civ. App. 222 - American Freehold Land Mortgage Co. of London v. Pace · New Georgia National Bank of Albany, Georgia v. J. & G. Lippmann · Way v. Lyric Theater Co. · Toon v. McCaw
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Where both parties have an identical intention as to the terms to be embodied in a proposed written conveyance, assignment, contract or discharge, and a writing executed by them is materially at variance with that intention, either party can get a decree that the writing shall be reformed so that it shall express the intention of the parties, if innocent third persons will not be unfairly affected thereby." 2 Restatement of Contracts, 968, § 504.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"One who executes a note in his own name, with nothing on the face of the note showing his agency, cannot introduce parol evidence to show that he executed it for a principal, or that the payee knew that he intended to execute it as agent." (p. 396) [Moore v. Webster, 191 Wash. 394 , 71 P.2d 369 (1937).] In the Toon case [Toon v. McCaw, 74 Wash. 335 , 133 P. 469 (1913).], the court used the following language, which was quoted with approval in the relatively recent Moore case: "There is no language in the note which raises even a slight ambiguity or creates any doubt as to the meaning of the instrument, or that remotely suggests that the makers were acting for another." (p. 337) Not only is the instant case one in equity, for reformation, where the parol evidence rule is inapplicable, but the two Akers notes now under discussion did each contain the name of the corporation as the sole promisor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“One who executes a note in his own name, with nothing on the face of the note showing his agency, cannot introduce parol evidence to show that he executed it for a principal, or that the payee knew that he intended to execute it as agent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.