Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 506 F.2d 1039 - Herbert P. Caplan v. John H. Roberts

Herbert P. Caplan v. John H. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis

506 F.2d 1039 · 1974

Citation profile

60
cited by 60 later decisions
5
states following
June 1995
most recently cited

33 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently June 1995 · most notably Johnson v. Phoenix Mutual Life Insurance (1980), Securities & Exchange Commission v. Murphy (1980)

33 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

320197419801990decided

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 Monarco v. Lo Greco · George L. Stansifer, Dba Lakewood Sports Cars v. Chrysler Motors Corporation, and J. O. Fisher Corporation (Jim Fisher Motors) · 73 Cal. App. 612 - Little v. Union Oil Co. · 122 Cal. App. 2d 608 - Goldstein v. McNeil

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

  1. “'only where there is no genuine issue of any material fact or where viewing the evidence . . . in the light most favorable to the adverse party, the movant is clearly entitled to prevail as a matter of law.'”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “. . . the only injury appellant, as the buyer under the oral contract, might have suffered from the seller's refusal to deliver, is the loss of the profit he was to make on the resale of the equipment. And, as Carlson v. Richardson, 267 Cal.App.2d 204, 208, 72 Cal.Rptr. 769 (1968) noted, the mere 'loss of bargain, and damage resulting therefrom, do not themselves estop a seller from relying upon the Statute of Frauds.'”
    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.