Dyer v. Bilaal’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 26 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Tsintolas Realty Co. v. Mendez (2009), Abdelrhman v. Ackerman (2013)
3 federal appellate · 26 district · 18 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 Teodore Dorotee Autera v. Manuel Dudley Robinson, Anthony C. Autera v. Manuel Dudley Robinson · Cobble Hill Nursing Home, Inc. v. Henry & Warren Corp. · 1010 Potomac Associates v. Grocery Manufacturers of America, Inc. · United States v. Jenrette · Jack Baker, Inc. v. Office Space Development Corp.
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A contract is not ambiguous merely because the parties disagree over its meaning, and courts are enjoined not to create ambiguity where none exists.... Rather, a contract is ambiguous when, and only when, it is, or the provisions at controversy are, reasonably or fairly susceptible of different constructions or interpretations, or of two or more different meanings, and it is not ambiguous where the court can determine its meaning without any other guide than a knowledge of the simple facts on which, from the nature of language in general, its meaning depends.... Accordingly, [t]he first step in contract interpretation is determining what a reasonable person in the position of the parties would have thought the disputed language meant.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“the written language embodying the terms of an agreement will govern the rights and liabilities of the parties [regardless] of the intent of the parties at the time they entered into the contract, unless the written language is not susceptible of a clear and definite undertaking, or unless there is fraud, duress[,] or mutual mistake.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“into the record, to which there was no objection. Id. at 356 . There was no mention of a confidentiality clause. Id. at 358 . When the parties attempted to put their agreement in writing, they reached an impasse regarding whether a confidentiality clause should be included. The plaintiff filed a motion to enforce the settlement agreement, arguing that the parties had no contract because the agreement omitted the material term of a confidentiality clause. The court opined that”
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.