87 Cal. App. 642 - Reiter v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 state decisions

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

1. ““ ‘A qualified form of “agency” which has grown up in modern times is that which exists when the owner or manufacturer of patented or other propriety articles grants the privilege of sale or of exclusive territory to one who otherwise might not be at liberty to sell the goods in question. It is entirely consistent with this arrangement that the so-called agent is to buy, of the proprietor or manufacturer, the goods which he is thus authorized to sell, and when this is the fact there is little more of “agency” in the case than the name'itself. It is also entirely consistent with the arrangement that the “agent” is to sell the goods at a price or upon terms or conditions fixed by the proprietor or manufacturer. A person so situated is often, in popular language, said to have obtained the “agency” for the goods, when all that is meant is that he has obtained a more or less exclusive right to buy and resell them in a prescribed territory. The transaction is simple enough, but the reports show many cases in which the parties have, perhaps, deceived themselves and have certainly attempted to deceive others by calling that an “agency” which had no resemblance to agency in fact, but was simply a sale of a proprietary article with a right of resale under terms and conditions fixed by the proprietor.’ 1 Mechem on Sales, pp. 41, 42.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Arecibo Motor Co. v. Caribe Motors Corp.