Ucc v. Gaf Corporation’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2017 · most notably Miller Elevator Co. v. United States (1994), McDonnell Douglas Corporation General Dynamics Corporation v. United States (1999)
1 federal appellate · 1 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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · United States v. Spearin · Hayes v. Lockhart · In re Disbarment of Schaefer · Michigan Citizens for an Independent Press v. Thornburgh
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) [The contractor] undertook] to perform without vital knowledge of a fact that affects performance costs or direction, (2) the government was aware the contractor had no knowledge of and had no reason to obtain such information, 1 (3) any contract specification supplied misled the contractor, or did not put it on notice to inquire, and (4) the government failed to provide the relevant information.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The [trial court] found that the Government had no reason to believe that [plaintiff] lacked knowledge about asbestos hazards. [Plaintiff] was an experienced asbestos supplier. Moreover, [plaintiff] supplied its asbestos products to commercial as well as Government customers. Under those circumstances, the Government had no reason to believe that [plaintiff] needed to learn more about asbestos hazards from its customer. Id.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Claims Court may not do by judicial fiat what Congress has not done by legislation. The trial court may not enforce a warranty implied in law. The Tucker Act does not grant the Claims Court jurisdiction to enforce contracts implied-in-law.”
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.