Cushing v. Rodman’s Empirical Analysis
82 F.2d 864 · 1936
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 5 district · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently May 2007 · most notably Edwin Green, Jr., as Administrator of the Estate of Edwin Green, Deceased, and Mary Green v. American Tobacco Company (1962), Clark v. Associated Retail Credit Men of Washington (1939)
14 federal appellate · 5 district · 19 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 Ryan v. Progressive Grocery Stores, Inc. · Friend v. Childs Dining Hall Co. · Ward v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. · Travis v. L. & N. R. R. · Race v. . Krum
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`The basis of implied warranty is justifiable reliance on the judgment or skill of the warrantor * * *.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Sec. 15. ... there is no implied warranty or condition as to the quality or fitness for any particular purpose of goods supplied under a contract to sell or a sale, ■ except as follows: “(1) Where the buyer, expressly or by implication, makes known to the seller the particular purpose for which the goods are required, and it appears that the buyer relies on the seller’s skill or judgment (whether he be the grower or manufacturer or not), there is an implied warranty that the goods shall be reasonably fit for such purpose. “Sec. 69. ... (1) Where there is a breach of warranty by the seller, the buyer may, at his election— * * * “(b) Accept or keep the goods and maintain an action against the seller for damages for the breach of warranty .... “Sec. 76. .'. . ‘Buyer’ means a person who buys or agrees to buy goods or any legal successor in interest of such person.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““. . . The customer does in fact rely upon a dispenser of food for more than the use of due care. He depends upon the experience and trade wisdom of the dispenser in selecting the articles or ingredients of the food, and upon his skill in the preparation and service thereof. The customer has no effective opportunity to inspect or select so far as wholesomeness is concerned. . . .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Levy v. Paul
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.