Fetz v. Phillips’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently November 2017
2 federal appellate · 16 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 Indiana & Michigan Electric Co. v. Terre Haute Industries, Inc. · State Ex Rel. Indiana State Board of Dental Examiners v. Judd · Sink & Edwards, Inc. v. Huber, Hunt & Nichols, Inc. · Kordick v. Merchants National Bank & Trust Co. of Indianapolis · Hupp v. Hill
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Time shall be of the essence of this Option [to Purchase]. If Lessee-Purchaser fails to perform or observe any other condition or term of this Contract and such default continues for a period of thirty (80) days after written notice thereof is given to Lessee-Purchaser, then Lessor-Vendor shall cancel this Option and take possession of the Real Estate and remove Lessee-Purchaser therefrom or those holding or claiming under Lessee-Purchaser, without any further demand. In the event of the Lessor-Vendor's cancellation after default by Lessee-Purchaser, all rights and demands of Lessee-Purchaser under this contract and in and to the Real Estate shall cease and terminate, and the Lessee-Purchaser shall have no further right, title or interest in or to the Real Estate.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Both parties agree the Phillipses failed to maintain liability insurance and to pay the property taxes as required under the lease. Under the above provision, however, Fetz was required to provide the Phillipses written notice of noneompliance. The record reveals Fetz never gave the Phillipses written notice of their failure to perform under the contract. Because notice was necessary before the lease and option could be can-celled, the option remained valid even though the Phillipses failed to comply with two requirements under the lease.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“When the language of a written contract is not ambiguous ... its meaning is a question of law `for which summary judgment is particularly appropriate.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.