Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 736 F.2d 1064 - Cosden Oil & Chemical Co. v. Karl O. Helm Aktiengesellschaft

Cosden Oil & Chemical Co. v. Karl O. Helm Aktiengesellschaft’s Empirical Analysis

736 F.2d 1064 · 1984

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
4
states following
November 2015
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently November 2015

9 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

1101984199020002010decided

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 Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Inc. v. Blankenship · Balistrieri v. United States · Williams v. United States · Lego v. Twomey · Triton Oil & Gas Corp. v. Marine Contractors and Supply, Inc.

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

  1. “the seller must notify the buyer seasonably that there will be a delay or non-delivery and, when allocation is required under paragraph (b) of this Code section, of the estimated quota thus made available for the buyer.”
    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.