Crouch v. General Electric Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently February 2011 · most notably Allison v. ITE Imperial Corp. (1991), Controlled Environments Construction, Inc. v. Key Industrial Refrigeration Co. (2003)
8 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 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
Applies 50 U.S.C. § 3901 (Servicemembers Civil Relief Act) · 50 U.S.C. § 3931 (Servicemembers Civil Relief Act) · 50 U.S.C. § 3935 (Servicemembers Civil Relief Act) · 50 U.S.C. App. § 510
Relies on Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Wisconsin v. Illinois · Bernick v. Jurden · Standard Alliance Industries, Inc. v. Black Clawson Co. · Bolick v. American Barmag 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]here a warranty explicitly extends to the future performance of the goods and discovery of the breach must await the time of such performance the cause of action accrues when the breach is or should have been discovered.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In recent years many states have enacted [statutes of repose]. They have been labeled “statutes of repose” in order to distinguish them from ordinary statutes of limitations which usually set much shorter time periods which run from the time the cause of action accrues, rather than from an arbitrary time such as the date of purchase. Because the date of injury is not a factor used in computing the running of the time period, and such statutes typically do not have tolling provisions, the statutes acquire a substantive nature, barring rights of action even before injury has occurred if the injury occurs subsequent to the prescribed time period.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The Contractor warrants that each of the . . . [helicopter] engines under contract. . . will, at the time delivery [sic] be free from defects in material and workmanship. “The warranty on each of the . . . engines shall cease three (3) years from the date the Government accepts the first engine ... or upon expiration of five hundred (500) total engine hours ....”
2 later decisions 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.