Peggy M. CHAVIN, I. Favel Chavin, and James P. Quinn, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. Beatrice A. COPE, Defendant Below, Appellee

1968-05-10 · Supreme Court of Delaware · United States

1What 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.

19821 judgments16 years silent19981 judgments7 years silent20051 judgments20061 judgments4 years silent20101 judgments

5 judgments have relied on it, across 1982–2010

first 1982 · last 2010 · busiest 1982 (1 judgments)

2010-10-04Versata Enterprises v. Selectica, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware 2006-07-10DOVER HISTORICAL SOCIETY, INC., Henry R. Horsey, Holly Johnson and Charles Johnson, Petitioners-Below, Appellants, v. CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION, Young & Malmberg, P.A., a Delaware Professional Association, and Yozima, L.L.C., a Delaware Limited Liability Company, Respondents-Below, Appellees; The Friends of Old Dover, Inc., Henry R. Horsey, Holly Johnson and Charles Johnson, Petitioners-Below, Appellants, v. City of Dover Planning Commission, Young & Malmberg, P.A., a Delaware Professional Association, and Yozima, L.L.C., a Delaware Limited Liability Company, Respondents-Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 2005-07-05Thomas T.S. KAUNG, Plaintiff-Below, Appellant, v. COLE NATIONAL CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation Defendant-Below, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware 1998-11-19H. Frederick JOHNSTON, Sandra Spillane and Technicorp International II, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Defendants Below, Appellants, v. ARBITRIUM (CAYMAN ISLANDS) HANDELS AG and Miklos Vendel, Plaintiffs Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1982-09-15CM & M GROUP, INC., Defendant Below, Appellant, Cross-Appellee, v. Thomas J. CARROLL, Plaintiff Below, Appellee, Cross-AppellantSupreme Court of Delaware

What it rests on

1954-12-08Pitts v. WhiteSupreme Court of Delaware

6 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.