Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 48 SW2D 432 - Goodman v. Bingle

Goodman v. Bingle’s Empirical Analysis

1932

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
2
states following
February 1973
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently February 1973

2 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

4019321940195019601970decided

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 Werner v. Graham · Curlee v. Walker · Hooper v. Lottman · Scull v. Eilenberg · Pierson v. Canfield

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

  1. ““Whether a person not a party to a restrictive covenant has the right to enforce it depends upon the intention of the parties in imposing it. This intention is to be ascertained from the language of the deed itself, construed in connection with the circumstances existing at the time it was executed. * * * ””
    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.