Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 823 F.2d 1105 - Palmer v. Beverly Enterprises

Palmer v. Beverly Enterprises’s Empirical Analysis

823 F.2d 1105 · 1987

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
3
states following
April 2009
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently April 2009 · most notably Gatx Leasing Corporation v. National Union Fire Insurance Company (1995), Curran v. Kwon (1998)

10 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

320198719902000decided

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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Vanston Bondholders Protective Committee v. Green · Gilbert v. First National Bank of Jackson

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

  1. “the place of contracting, negotiation, performance, location of the subject matter of the contract, and the domicil[e], residen[ce], place of incorporation, and business of the parties.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Contractual Liability of Principal to Third Person (1) Whether a principal is bound by action taken on his behalf by an agent in dealing with a third person is determined by the local law of the state which, with respect to the particular issue, has the most significant relationship to the parties and the transaction under the principles stated in § 6. (2) The principal will be held bound by the agent’s action if he would so be held bound under the local law of the state where the agent dealt with the third person, provided at least that the principal had authorized the agent to act on his behalf in that state or had led the third person reasonably to believe that the agent had such authority.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The criticism of choice of law rules grounded on the vested rights doctrine applies with full force to [the] case where [a state's] only interest in [the] dispute is by virtue of the alleged making of the contract there ... and the significance traditionally bestowed upon that fact by the vested rights doctrine.”
    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.