Yuhas v. Schmidt’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 77 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 94 later decisions — most recently September 2013 · most notably Frowen v. Blank (1981), Field v. Golden Triangle Broadcasting, Inc. (1973)
3 federal appellate · 77 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 Masciantonio Will · Boyd Estate · Girard Trust Bank v. Sweeney · Universal Film Exchanges, Inc. v. Viking Theatre Corp. · Dunn v. Orloff
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 94 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The first issue involves the Chancellor’s [finding that the parties entered into a particular oral agreement]. We are mindful that the findings of the Chancellor will not be reversed unless it appears that he has clearly abused his discretion or committed an error of law ... and that the findings have the full force of a jury verdict and, if supported by sufficient evidence and if affirmed by the court en banc, will not be disturbed on appeal____ As we stated in Masciantonio Will ... “The test is not whether we, the appellate court, would have reached the same result had we been acting as the hearing judge who saw and heard the witness, ‘but rather whether a judicial mind, on due consideration of the evidence, as a whole, could reasonably have reached the conclusion of the chancellor.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Where Resulting Trust Arises A resulting trust arises where a person makes or causes to be made a disposition of property under circumstances which raise an inference that he does not intend that the person taking or holding the property should have the beneficial interest therein, unless the inference is rebutted or the beneficial interest is otherwise effectively disposed of.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Where a party* * * seeking to have a written agreement enforced according to its terms, [a]dmits in his own trial testimony that the agreement in writing did not Full and Completely state the entire agreement between the parties, then parol evidence is admissible to explain and supplement such written agreement.””
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.