Madison v. Marlatt’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Rocky Mountain Oil and Gas Ass'n v. State (1982), Moncrief v. Louisiana Land & Exploration Co. (1993)
37 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 Daellenbach v. State · Shepard v. Top Hat Land & Cattle Co. · Meuse-Rhine-Ijssel Cattle Breeders of Canada Ltd. v. Y-Tex Corp. · Peterson v. State · Knudson v. Hilzer
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Sjummary judgment is an inappropriate means of construing a contract only when the contract is ambiguous on its face and the extrinsic evidence, admissible as a result of said ambiguity, raises a real issue of fact requiring resolution at trial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“To be effective an acceptance must be unconditional; it cannot be combined with any conditions which materially vary the terms of the offer. If such conditions are included, the acceptance is treated as a rejection of the original offer and acts as a counter offer vesting in the original offeror the power of acceptance.” Madison v. Marlatt, 619 P.2d 708, 715 (Wyo.1980).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“An option is a continuing offer to sell and, even though it is conditioned for exercise within a limited time, the option is nevertheless an executory, unilateral contract. ... The exclusive right to conclude the transaction must be vested solely in the optionee, and the optionor must have no choice but to abide by the terms of the commitment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bennett v. Foust
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.