Edward A. Kerbs and George J. Haney, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, vs. California Eastern Airways, Inc., a Delaware Corporation. Defendant Below, Appellee

1952-07-17 · Supreme Court of Delaware · United States

1What it rests on

9Relied 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.

+3 earlier19641 judgments13 years silent19771 judgments19781 judgments19791 judgments5 years silent19841 judgments19871 judgments

9 judgments have relied on it, across 1952–1987

first 1952 · last 1987 · busiest 1952 (1 judgments)

1987-12-23Georges MARCIANO, Maurice Marciano, Armand Marciano, and Paul Marciano, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. Joe NAKASH, Ralph Nakash, Avi Nakash and Gasoline, Ltd., a Delaware Corporation, Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 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 1979-10-02A. Elihu MICHELSON, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. Louis C. DUNCAN, G. R. Ellis, Thomas D. Flynn, Joseph W. James, Mitchell P. Kartalia, Paul C. Nagel, Jr., Gordon P. Osler, Arthur E. Rasmussen, George W. Rauch, A. O. Steffey, James W. Tait, Robert C. Trow, Miller Upton, William E. Wehner, John C. Whitehead, D. C. Clark, John T. Gurash and Household Finance Corporation, Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1978-02-15A. Elihu MICHELSON, Plaintiff, v. Louis C. DUNCAN Et Al., DefendantsCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1977-10-20Charles KAPLAN, Plaintiff, v. Robert S. GOLDSAMT, Bernard J. Korman, Alan B. Miller, Leonard W. Cronkhite, Jr., Thomas L. Kempner, Leonard M. Leiman, Louis Rones, J. Irving Schwartz, Joseph Ziegler and American Medicorp, Inc., DefendantsCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1964-11-17Hoffman v. DannSupreme Court of Delaware 1960-02-11Beard v. ElsterSupreme Court of Delaware 1959-10-28Lieberman v. BeckerSupreme 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

What it rests on

1933-05-29ROGERS v. HILL Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States

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.