Lee v. Hawks’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The statute of frauds debars one of an action on a contract, in certain cases, unless the contract be in writing; but a parol agreement to annul or waive a particular stipulation in the written contract which has been mutually assented to and fully performed, may be offered in evidence in defense of an action for a breach of the original written contract. An action may not be maintained, in cases within the statute, upon a contract not in writing; but a defense may be made by showing an executed parol agreement waiving or annulling a particular provision of the written contract. The subject is not free from difficulty, and the discussions by text-writers, and the opinions of courts in reported cases, are full of subtle distinctions and refinements, nor is the current of authority clearly bent in any direction. The views briefly advanced hereinbefore are supported by some excellent authorities, and are agreeable to reason and justice. Benjamin in his admirable work on Sales, (page 229), states the rule with his usual clearness: "Parol evidence to prove, not a substituted contract, but the assent of the defendant to a substituted mode of performance of the original contract, when that performance is completed, is admissible." See Swain v. Seamens, 9 Wall. 254 , [ 19 L.Ed. 554 ]; Jackson v. Litch, 62 Pa.St. 451 ; Long v. Hartwell, 34 N.J.Law, 116 ; Reed on Statutes of Fraud, § 239. ( 68 Miss. 671, 672 , 9 So. 828 ).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Williamson v. Metzger