First National State Bank of New Jersey v. Commonwealth Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Norristown’s Empirical Analysis
610 F.2d 164 · 1979
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2019 · most notably Bowen v. Massachusetts (1988), Mellon Bank, N.A. v. Aetna Business Credit, Inc. (1980)
14 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 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 Shoup Voting Machine Corp. v. Datamedia Computer Service, Inc. · St. Paul at Chase Corp. v. Manufacturers Life Insurance · Fleischer v. James Drug Stores, Inc. · 42 N.J. Super. 332 - Jardine Estates, Inc. v. Donna Brook Corp. · Borough of Brooklawn v. Brooklawn Housing Corp.
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Generally, the remedy at law is said to be inadequate in two situations: (1) where damages would be insufficient because the subject matter of the contract is of such a special nature that it resists translation into quantitative terms — the damage remedy “ ‘would not be a just and reasonable substitute for or representative of that subject-matter in the hands of the party who is entitled to its benefit’ ”; or (2) where “damages are impracticable” because “it is impossible to arrive at a legal measure of damages at all, or at least with any sufficient degree of certainty.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(T)he real test is whether the contracting parties intended that a third party should receive a benefit which might be enforced in the courts; and the fact that such a benefit exists, or that the third party is named, is merely evidence of this intention.”
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.