American Cotton Oil Co. v. Kirk’s Empirical Analysis
68 F. 791 · 1895
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently January 1932
13 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 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 National Furnace Co. v. Keystone Manufacturing Co. · Davie v. Lumberman's Mining Co. · Houston & Texas Central Railway Co. v. Mitchell · Wilkinson v. Heavenrich · Greenberry Dorsey v. Samuel Packwood
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““There is no mutuality of promises for the sale of a definite or ascertainable quantity of oil. Suppose the plaintiffs had decided upon ordering 6 barrels of oil per week, or 1 barrel for every working day. That would require 32 years for the fulfillment of the contract. And we can discover no way, by the terms of the contract, whereby the defendant could put the plaintiffs in default, * * * because the amount and times of ordering are left wholly to the plaintiffs.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. The Gleaner““Suppose Kirie & Co. had not desired and had not ordered any such Quantities as would require 100 years to complete the delivery — is there any way open to the defendant to put plaintiffs in default? We think not, and that there is no mutuality of promises for the sale of a definite or ascertainable quantity of oil.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.