Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 372 N.W.2d 203 - Beckman v. Carson

Beckman v. Carson’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
November 2006
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 2006

2 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

60198519902000decided

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 Westway Trading Corp. v. River Terminal Corp. · Maytag Company v. Alward · Nora Springs Cooperative Co. v. Brandau · Binkholder v. Carpenter · State v. Rush

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

  1. “322A.2 Discontinuing Franchise. Notwithstanding the terms, provisions or conditions of any agreement or franchise, no franchiser shall terminate or refuse to continue any franchise unless the franchiser has first established in a hearing held under the provisions of this chapter, that: 1. The franchiser has good cause for termination or noncontinuanee, and 2. Upon termination or noncontinuance, another franchise in the same line-make will become effective in the same community, without diminution of the motor vehicle service formerly “provided [[Image here]]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “so substantial as to defeat the object of the contracting parties.” Beckman v. Carson, 372 N.W.2d 203, 208 (Iowa 1985); accord Nora Springs Co-op. Co. v. Brandau, 247 N.W.2d 744, 749 (Iowa 1976); Alward, 112 N.W.2d at 660 ; see also White v. Massee, 202 Iowa 1304, 211 N.W. 839, 841 (Iowa 1927) (”
    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.