Harold K. Baron, Appellant, vs. Pressed Metals of America, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and Frederick W. Richmond, Appellees

1956-07-05 · Supreme Court of Delaware · United States

read the judgment

0What it rests on

4Relied 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.

19561 judgments12 years silent19681 judgments6 years silent19741 judgments19771 judgments

4 judgments have relied on it, across 1956–1977

first 1956 · last 1977 · busiest 1956 (1 judgments)

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 1974-01-10Louis S. GIMBEL, III, Plaintiff, v. the SIGNAL COMPANIES, INC., Et Al., DefendantsCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1968-02-14William S. EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, v. the CELOTEX CORPORATION, the South Coast Corporation, South Shore Oil & Development Company and Jim Walter Corporation, DefendantsCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1956-12-21Helen E. Cottrell, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, vs. the Pawcatuck Company (Formerly the C. B. Cottrell & Sons Company), a Delaware Corporation (Known as the Old Company), Harris-Seybold Company, a Delaware Corporation, Donald C. Cottrell, Ridley Watts, Arthur M. Cottrell, Jr., Charles P. Cottrell, Jr., and the Cottrell Company, a Delaware Corporation (Known as the New Company), Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware

What it rests on

No citation has been read out of this judgment.

The European Court does not publish its citations as data. They are read out of the text of the judgment itself. Until that reading reaches this judgment, it has no outgoing edge.

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.