51 N.J. Super. 31 - Leitner v. Braen’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 6 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably Weichert Co. Realtors v. Ryan (1992), Baer v. Chase (2004)
11 federal appellate · 6 district · 22 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 Savarese v. Pyrene Manufacturing Co. · Friedman v. Tappan Development Corp. · Corn Exchange National Bank & Trust Co., Philadelphia v. Taubel · Johnson & Johnson v. Charmley Drug Co. · 29 N.J. Super. 383 - Ballurio v. Castellini
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to impose the requisite that there is no contract unless both parties understood the terms alike, regardless of the expressions they manifested.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. J.I. Hass Co., Inc. v. Gilbane Building Company, a Corp. In the State of Rhode Island. Appeal of Gilbane Building Company, in No. 88-5465. J.I. Hass Co., Inc., in No. 88-5523 v. Gilbane Building Company, a Corp. In the State of Rhode Island · Ji Hass Co Inc v. Gilbane Building Company Gilbane Building Company 88-5465 Ji Hass Co Inc 88-5523““The concept of mutual assent is customarily stated as one of the primary requisites to the formation of an informal contract. Such mutual assent is, however, unimportant except as it is manifested by one party to the other, generally by a communicated offer and acceptance. (Citations omitted) So the obligation depends not on the so-called real intent of a party, but on that expressed. (Citations omitted) The phrase, ‘meeting of the minds,’ can properly mean only the agreement reached by the parties as expressed, i. e., their manifested intention, not one secret or undisclosed, which may be wholly at variance with the former. (Citations omitted) It is in this sense only that the formation of a contract can be said to require the ‘meeting of the minds’ of the parties.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“can only mean the agreement reached by the parties as expressed). When looking for mutual assent, a court will take these outward expressions and ask”
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.