Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 388 F.2d 66 - Glens Falls Insurance v. Newton Lumber & Mfg. Co.

Glens Falls Insurance v. Newton Lumber & Mfg. Co.’s Empirical Analysis

388 F.2d 66 · 1967

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
3
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

41 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Norman v. Young (1970), Ragan v. Tri-County Excavating, Inc. (1995)

41 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

220196719701980199020002010decided

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 United States v. Oregon State Medical Society · Prado Oil & Gas Co. v. Federal Power Commission · St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity Company v. United States of America for the Use of H. C. Jones, Doing Business as H. C. Jones Construction Company, Burden Ivy Barfield, Bourdon Ray Barfield, and Oliver Eakle Barfield, as Co-Partners Doing Business as Barfield Construction Company v. United States of America for the Use of H. C. Jones, Doing Business as H. C. Jones Construction Company · British America Assur. Co. v. Bowen

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

  1. “That the contract between DMH and Campbell was a sham; that Campbell permitted the use of his name in the contract with Whiteside Construction for the benefit of DMH; that there was no intent to impose a contractual obligation on Campbell ...; that the purpose of using Campbell’s name in the contract ... purporting to be a subcontract between Campbell and Whiteside Construction, and the contract ... purporting to be a subcontract between DMH and Campbell, was to make it appear that Campbell was a subcontractor of DMH and Whiteside Construction a subcontractor of Campbell, and thereby insulate DMH from liability to material-men for materials furnished to White-side Construction for the housing project, and that Campbell’s relationship with DMH was that of agent or employee.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “properly regarded substance, rather than form,”
    1 later decision 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.