Jahn v. Burns’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 28 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““* * * U.C.C. section 1-207 provides that: “[‘] A party who with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved. Such words as “without prejudice”, “under protest” or the like are sufficient. [’] “This section first appeared in the Proposed Final Draft of 1950 and has remained unchanged through the current official version. “Of particular interest is the coexistence of sections 1-207 and 3-802(3) in the 1950 and 1952 drafts. In the 1952 Official Draft, section 3-802(3) provided: “[‘JWhere a check or similar payment instrument provides that it is in full satisfaction of an obligation the payee discharges the underlying obligation by obtaining payment of the instrument unless he establishes that the original obligor has taken unconscionable advantage in the circumstances. [’] “This section codified the common law where there was a disputed and unliquidated debt by providing that the underlying obligation is discharged by obtaining payment of the check unless the payee establishes that the original obligor has taken unconscionable advantage of him; however, section 3-802(3) changed the common law with regard to undisputed and unliquidated debts in that it speaks only of a check in ‘full satisfaction of an obligation’ without qualifying the term obligation or requiring that it be unliquidated or undisputed. The 1956 Official Draft subsequent”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 44 N.C. App. 454 - Brown v. Coastal Truckways, Inc. · 37 Ohio App. 3d 87 - Hearst Corp. v. Lauerer, Markin & Gibbs, Inc.

2. ““1. This section provides machinery for the continuation of performance along the lines contemplated by the contract despite a pending dispute, by adopting the mercantile device of going ahead with delivery, acceptance, or payment ‘without prejudice,’ ‘under protest,’ ‘under reserve,’ ‘with reservation of all our rights,’ and the like. All of these phrases completely reserve all rights within the meaning of this section. The section therefore contemplates that limited as well as general reservations and acceptance by a party may be made ‘subject to satisfaction of our purchaser,’ ‘subject to acceptance by our customers,’ or the like.” (Emphasis added.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. AFC Interiors v. DiCello

3. “interpretation, transferability, negotiability, rights of holders, and other aspects of the instrument itself. If the other portions of the transaction are not `commercial,' the use of commercial paper does not cause them to fall within the provisions of the Code.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ditch Witch Trenching Co. of Kentucky v. C & S Carpentry Services, Inc.