Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 707 FSUPP 657 - Stetson v. Duncan

Stetson v. Duncan’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
September 1996
most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1060 (§ 10 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act))

Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Thomas v. Arn · Vandygriff v. Phillips · Hannahville Indian Community v. United States

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

  1. “[I]f either party communicates an intent not to be bound until he achieves a fully executed document, no amount of negotiation or oral agreement to specific terms ■will result in the formation of a binding contract. Because of this freedom to determine the exact point at which an agreement becomes binding, a party can negotiate candidly, secure in the knowledge that he will not be bound until execution of what both parties consider to be final document [sic].”
    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.