Bethurem v. Hammett’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently February 2020
4 federal appellate · 1 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
Relies on Amoco Production Co. v. Stauffer Chemical Co. · Purcell v. Miner · Cordova v. Gosar · Dugan v. Jones · Young v. Stevens
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As a general rule, courts will ascertain the intentions of the parties by interpreting the language that is used in the contract and will not resort to adding what has been omitted or omitting what has been added. If the contract is in writing and the language is clear and unambiguous, the intention is to be established from the words of the contract by considering the contract as a whole and reading each provision in light of all other provisions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“oral understandings into an agreement where those understandings contradict, alter, add to, or vary the plain terms of the writing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.