Singleton v. Foster’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
1 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently October 2018
1 district · 6 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 Dunn v. Baugh · Williams v. Havens · Frasier v. Carter · Watkins v. Watkins · Gardner v. Hollifield
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where a contract for sale of real estate makes time of the essence, and provides for a forfeiture of the vendee’s rights for failure on his part to make payments at certain times, a continued course of conduct on the part of the vendor in failing to declare a forfeiture, thereby leading the vendee to believe that the vendor waives a strict compliance with the terms of the contract, works a waiver of the vendor’s right to declare a forfeiture, unless and until he gives the vendee reasonable notice of his intention to do so, and a reasonable opportunity to make the delinquent payments.” Sullivan v. Burcaw, 35 Idaho 755, 763 , 208 P. 841, 843 (1922). See also, Singleton v. Foster, 98 Idaho 149 , 559 P.2d 765, 768 (1977) (Bistline, J., concurring).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Ellis v. Butterfield““ ‘By the terms of the written contract, if respondent Company wanted by reason of her default in the payments, to end and conclude her right to purchase, it had to give notice, which respondent Company never alleged it did and made no attempt to prove it did, and the record discloses beyond peradventure of a doubt that no such notice was given or forfeiture declared as recited in the written contract.’ Stockmen’s Supply Co., 72 Idaho at 62 , 237 P.2d at 617 .” Singleton v. Foster, 98 Idaho at 152, 559 P.2d at 768 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Motions to dismiss complaints on the basis of statutes of limitations are generally viewed with disfavor.... There are, however, numerous reasons why the statute may have been tolled which under the holding of Duff v. Draper [ 96 Idaho 299 , 527 P.2d 1257 (1974) ], supra , need not have been expressly set forth in the Complaint.”
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.