O'KEEFFE v. Bry’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently February 2007
10 federal appellate · 3 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 Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Babcock v. Jackson · Intercontinental Planning, Ltd. v. Daystrom Inc. · 89 F. Supp. 357 - United States v. United Shoe MacHinery Corporation · Miller v. . Schloss
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`additional services' are `so distinct from the [contractual] duties . . . that it would be unreasonable for the [defendant] to assume that they were rendered without expectation of further pay.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“on [its] face to the transaction covered by the core document.” Id. at 829 . 3 . Although both the June 1st and November 2nd letters, “were not prepared or signed with the intention of evidencing the contract ... they were signed with intent to authenticate the information contained therein and such information does evidence the terms of the contract.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dickerson v. Kaplan“To the extent that Crabtree permits the use of a 'confluence of memoranda,' the minimum condition for such use is the existence of one [signed] document establishing the basic, underlying contractual commitment.”
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.