Bogle v. Potter’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently April 1999 · most notably Grandi v. LeSage (1965), Herrera v. C & R PAVING COMPANY (1963)
2 federal appellate · 36 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 Pentecost v. Hudson · Bogle v. Potter · Duggan v. Matthew Cummings Co. · Menger v. Otero County State Bank · Gibbs v. Whelan
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The failure of Potter to include in the letter, making the offer, all details of carrying the proposal into effect to accomplish its purpose did not prevent there being a meeting of the minds and an intention to be bound. Those details were not essential to the' proposal, because, without them, the offer was not too indefinite for enforcement. The details of carrying out the agreement in such manner as not to create a tax liability did not change the terms or purpose to be accomplished by the offer. Stites v. Yelverton, 60 N.M. 190 , 289 P.2d 628 ; Duggan v. Matthew Cummings Co., 277 Mass. 445 , 178 N.E. 825 . (Emphasis added.)”
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.