Bondy v. Harvey’s Empirical Analysis
62 F.2d 521 · 1933
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently May 1974
1 federal appellate · 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 Heyman Cohen & Sons, Inc. v. M. Lurie Woolen Co. · United States v. John McMullen · Higgins v. California Prune & Apricot Grower, Inc. · Ansorge v. Kane · Fluegel v. Coudert
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The phrase `mutual satisfaction' means reasonable satisfaction. * * * Assuming that mutual satisfaction is equivalent to satisfaction to each party independently, that mutual satisfaction necessarily would have to be reasonable satisfaction * * *. The burden we have here is to find out whether the parties have reserved the right to be arbitrary or whether they have such right for a reasonable satisfaction controlling upon both contracting parties. We think that we should construe `mutual satisfaction' as reasonable satisfaction and thus uphold 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.