Rucker v. Harrington’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

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

1. ““But a contract is only burdensome because of the consequence of performance flowing from it. Per se the contract is harmless. It is the performance that does the hurt. It is, therefore, at least, equally proper to say that the principal design of the statute was to protect parties from the performance of burdensome contracts which they never made. Therefore, if you may enforce an oral agreement for a substituted performance of a written agreement, you apply the statute to the shadow and withhold it from the substance. Such application of the statute only makes it necessary that parties have a contract in writing; then, under the guise of performance, the contract enforced is shown by parol.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bamberger Co. v. Certified Productions, Inc.

2. ““The great weight of authority favors the proposition that subsequent verbal,changes or modifications are not allowed to affect the original writing. (Citing cases.) And this is said to be true without regard to whether the oral agreement relates to those things which, standing apart, wotfld not be affected by the Statute of Frauds.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 213 Mo. App. 195 - Roburt v. Holmes