Goeken v. Kay’s Empirical Analysis
751 F.2d 469 · 1985
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Pullman-Standard v. Swint · Gallick v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad · Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Ellerman Lines, Ltd. · Loranger Construction Corp. v. E. F. Hauserman Co. · 2 Mass. App. Ct. 722 - Cellucci v. Sun Oil Co.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1) That the promisor made a promise which he reasonably should expect to induce action or forbearance of a definite and substantial character on the part of the promisee. 2) The promise induced such action or forbearance. 3) Injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise.”
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.