Tomran, Inc. v. Passano’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
12 district · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably Cochran v. Norkunas (2007), Dumbarton Improvement Ass'n v. Druid Ridge Cemetery Co. (2013)
12 district · 28 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 Edgar v. Mite Corp. · Pinker v. Roche Holdings Ltd. · General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Daniels · Bausch & Lomb Inc. v. Utica Mutual Insurance · Taylor v. NationsBank, N.A.
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'The cardinal rule of contract interpretation is to give effect to the parties' intentions.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Had the parties intended the choice of law clause to govern ‘all rights’ as Tomran urges, there would be no need to include the phrases ‘hereunder and thereunder’ in the clause. Thus, were we to conclude that the clause applied to ‘all rights’ regardless of their inclusion in the [Agreement], we would be rendering the phrase ‘hereunder and thereunder’ nugatory.”
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.