Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 512 F.2d 365 - Spang Industries, Inc., Fort Pitt Bridge Division, a Corporation, Plaintiff v. The Aetna Casualty and Surety Co., a Corporation, Torrington Construction Co., Inc. v. Spang Industries, Inc., Fort Pitt Bridge Division, a Corporation, Defendant-Third-Party v. Syracuse Rigging Co., Inc., Third-Party

Spang Industries, Inc., Fort Pitt Bridge Division, a Corporation, Plaintiff v. The Aetna Casualty and Surety Co., a Corporation, Torrington Construction Co., Inc. v. Spang Industries, Inc., Fort Pitt Bridge Division, a Corporation, Defendant-Third-Party v. Syracuse Rigging Co., Inc., Third-Party’s Empirical Analysis

512 F.2d 365 · 1975

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
4
states following
February 2016
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably William R. Van Gemert v. The Boeing Company and Thomas R. Wilcox (1977), Campbell v. United States (1987)

12 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

16019751980199020002010decided

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 Globe Refining Company v. Landa Cotton Oil Company · Czarnikow-Rionda Co. v. Federal Sugar Refining Co. · Kerr Steamship Co. v. Radio Corp. of America · Leonard v. New York, Albany & Buffalo Electro Magnetic Telegraph Co. · Krauss v. Greenbarg

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

  1. “such as may reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of both parties, at the time they made the contract, as the probable result of the breach of it.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “then it must be' established that the special circumstances giving rise to them should reasonably have been anticipated at the time the contract was made.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[The [Hadley] rule does not require that the direct damages must necessarily follow, but only that they are likely to follow.”
    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.