Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 39 FLA 452 - Chamberlain v. Lesley

Chamberlain v. Lesley’s Empirical Analysis

1897

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
4
states following
December 1982
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently December 1982 · most notably McClure v. Century Estates, Inc. (1928), Florida Moss Products Co. v. City of Leesburg (1927)

7 federal appellate · 27 state decisions

801897190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Chapin v. . Dobson · Routledge v. . Worthington Co. · Graffam v. Pierce · Love v. Gibson · Beagle v. Harby

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

  1. ““The papers, neither separately nor combined, purported to state all the terms of the agreement between the plaintiff and defendant. As a matter of fact, the notes and mortgages were not contracts between the plaintiff and the defendant, but were contracts between the plaintiff and the defendant on the one part and a third party on the other. These papers purported to show the contract between the plaintiff and defendant to and with a third person, but not as between themselves. The rule excluding parol evidence does not apply to cases where the original contract was verbal and entire, and a part only of it has been reduced to writing. Where, therefore, the writings do not purport to contain ■ the entire agreement, nor to have been intended as a complete statement or performance of the whole contract, and they were executed in pursuance of a parol agreement, and in part performance thereof, parol evidence of the verbal agreement is admissible in all cases where such evidence is consistent with, and not contrary to, such written instruments.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““ ‘This (the parol) evidence did not in any respect tend to change, alter, or add to the deeds, mortgages, and notes offered in evidence. The legal effect of each of these papers was the same, with or without the- oral testimony. It neither took from, nor added to, these papers, in the slightest degree, but was entirely consistent therewith.’ ””
    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.