Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 529 FSUPP2D 1009 - Parler v. KFC Corp.

Parler v. KFC Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
5
states following
January 2024
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently January 2024

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

40200820102020decided

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

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 216

Relies on Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. · Green Tree Financial Corp. v. Bazzle · Marie v. Allied Home Mortgage Corp. · N&d Fashions, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation and Nelly Don, Inc., a Missouri Corporation v. Dhj Industries, Inc., a New York Corporation · Ehleiter v. Grapetree Shores, Inc.

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. “The assertion “I didn’t know what was in the contract that I signed” is made by litigants frequently but almost never successfully. Absent fraud, a person is deemed to know the contents of a contract that he or she signs ... [t]hus whether [the party] actually knew of the [clause] in their contracts is irrelevant; that knowledge is imputed as a matter of law.”
    2 later decisions 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.