Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 83 F.1d 116 - Godkin v. Monahan

Godkin v. Monahan’s Empirical Analysis

83 F. 116 · 1897

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
April 1919
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 1919

8 federal appellate · 3 district ·

60189719001910decided

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 Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating Machine Co. · Thomas v. . Scutt · Thompson v. Insurance Co. · Insurance Company v. Mowry · Harrison v. Fortlage

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

  1. ““* * * ‘Whenever the contract purports on its face to be a memorial of the transaction, it supersedes all prior negotiations and agreements, and * * * oral testimony will not be admitted of prior or contemporaneous promises on a subject so clearly connected with the principal transaction with respect to which the parties are contending as to be part and parcel of the transaction itself, without the adjustment of which the parties cannot be considered as having finished their negotiations and finally concluded a contract.’ We recognized the rule that parol evidence may be received of the existence of an independent oral agreement not inconsistent with the stipulations of the written contract in respect to which the writing does not speak, but no.t to vary," qualify, or contradict, add to, or subtract from, the absolute terms of the written contract.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““But such an agreement must not only be collateral, but must relate to a subject distinct from that to which the written contract applies; that is, it must not be so closely connected with the principal transaction as to form part and parcel of it.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.