Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 938 F.2d 338 - Public Service Company of New Hampshire v. Hudson Light and Power Department Public Service Co of New Hampshire

Public Service Company of New Hampshire v. Hudson Light and Power Department Public Service Co of New Hampshire’s Empirical Analysis

938 F.2d 338 · 1991

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
4
states following
October 2020
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently October 2020

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions

701991200020102020decided

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 Hickman v. Taylor · Norton Ex Rel. Chiles v. Mathews · Fourth Ocean Putnam Corp. v. Interstate Wrecking Co. · Rae v. Air-Speed, Inc. · Choate, Hall & Stewart v. SCA Services, Inc.

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

  1. “The structure of the performance required under the particular contract often provides the critical indicum [sic] of intent in third party beneficiary cases. Unless the performance required by the contract will directly benefit the would-be intended beneficiary, he is at best an incidental beneficiary.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. In re Mcgraw-Hill Global Educ. Holdings LLC
  2. “Ever since Choate ... Massachusetts courts steadfastly have refused to accord intended beneficiary status under a contract whose terms, interpreted in the particular transactional setting, do not provide for the benefits of performance to flow directly to the third party.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. In Re Mortgage Investors Corp.

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.