Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 592 F.3d 255 - Bukuras v. Mueller Group, LLC

Bukuras v. Mueller Group, LLC’s Empirical Analysis

592 F.3d 255 · 2010

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
2
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 18A (Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976)

Relies on Starr v. Fordham · Waldman v. American Honda Motor Co. · Cady v. Marcella · Commissioner of Corporations & Taxation v. Club · Basis Technology Corp. v. Amazon.com, 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “in a reasonable and practical way, consistent with its language, background, and purpose.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “must be gathered from a fair construction of the contract as a whole.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he interpretation of an unambiguous contract is a question of law for the court, as is the initial determination of whether an ambiguity exists.” Bukuras v. Mueller Group, LLC, 592 F.3d 255, 261 (1st Cir.2010). But where the contract”
    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.