Lieberman v. Becker

1959-10-28 · Supreme Court of Delaware · United States

read the judgment

5What it rests on

5Relied on since

0Departed from

Relied on since

The judgments that cite this one. This is the answer that tells you the case is still alive.

19601 judgments19621 judgments19641 judgments20 years silent19842 judgments

5 judgments have relied on it, across 1960–1984

first 1960 · last 1984 · busiest 1984 (2 judgments)

1984-06-21Bernard POGOSTIN, Ann Brown and Irwin J. Newman, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. W. Thomas RICE, Eliot H. Stein, Fred Sullivan, A. Lightfoot Walker, Arthur C. Babson, Francis L. Cappaert, Edwin I. Hatch, Peter C. Huang, George T. Scharfenberger, Joe E. Lonning, Daniel E. Lyons, Stephen E. O’Neil, Eben W. Pyne, John H. Washburn and City Investing Company, Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1984-03-01Senior ARONSON, Et Al., Defendants Below, Appellants, v. Harry LEWIS, Plaintiff Below, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware 1964-11-17Hoffman v. DannSupreme Court of Delaware 1962-09-10Saxe v. BradyCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1960-02-11Beard v. ElsterSupreme Court of Delaware

What it rests on

1952-10-21Kaufman v. ShoenbergCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1952-08-29Tessie Gottlieb, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, vs. Heyden Chemical Corporation, a Corporation of the State of Delaware, Defendant Below, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware 1952-07-17Edward A. Kerbs and George J. Haney, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, vs. California Eastern Airways, Inc., a Delaware Corporation. Defendant Below, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware 1952-07-17Tessie Gottlieb, Plaintiff—below, Appellant, vs. Heyden Chemical Corporation, a Corporation of the State of Delaware, Defendant—below, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware 1933-05-29ROGERS v. HILL Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States

2 point outside the corpus. Read from the text, but no judgment held here answers to them. They are counted rather than hidden: this corpus is a slice, not the law.

Departed from

No judgment recorded a departure from this one.

Departure is not detected yet, and the gap is deliberate. Searching for the words the Court might use was measured on 1,019 judgments: "depart from" appears 100 times and most often means departing from the facts found by a domestic court; "overruled" appears 44 times, usually about a domestic judgment; "abandon" appears 123 times, most often as abandoned firearms. Tightened to require the Court itself as the subject, precision was still around 40%, the rest being a dissenting judge complaining, or a national supreme court departing from its own case-law. Telling a lawyer an authority is dead when it is alive is worse than saying nothing, so nothing is what this says until each candidate can be judged properly.

not characterised

Most citations carry no word at all. The Court does not always say what it is doing when it cites one of its own judgments, and where it stayed silent nothing is inferred here.