Libby G. LYNCH, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. VICKERS ENERGY CORPORATION, Esmark, Inc., William A. Alexander, Richard J. Boushka, Edward J. Hudson, Donald P. Kelly, Robert D. Phillips, Stormy F. Smith and Jack A. Vickers, Defendants, Appellees

1981-04-03 · Supreme Court of Delaware · United States

read the judgment

15What 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.

19831 judgments5 years silent19881 judgments19911 judgments19921 judgments19931 judgments

5 judgments have relied on it, across 1983–1993

first 1983 · last 1993 · busiest 1983 (1 judgments)

1993-12-08In Re TRI-STAR PICTURES, INC., LITIGATIONSupreme Court of Delaware 1992-08-26Benjamin GAFFIN, on Behalf of Himself and All Other Persons Similarly Situated, Appellant, v. TELEDYNE, INC., a Corporate Entity, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware 1991-04-11Ruth KAHN, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. HOUSEHOLD ACQUISITION CORPORATION and Household Finance Corporation, Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1988-04-04SUMMA CORPORATION and William R. Lummis, Delaware Ancillary Administrator of the Estate of Howard R. Hughes, Defendants Below, Appellants, v. TRANS WORLD AIRLINES, INC., Plaintiff Below, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware 1983-02-01William B. WEINBERGER, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. UOP, INC., Et Al., Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware

What it rests on

1980-02-20Edith K. BELL Et Al., Petitioners Below-Appellants/Cross-Appellees, v. KIRBY LUMBER CORPORATION, Respondent Below-Appellee/Cross-AppellantSupreme Court of Delaware 1977-10-18Libby G. LYNCH, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. VICKERS ENERGY CORPORATION Et Al., Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1977-09-23Louis S. SINGER and Mollie Singer, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. the MAGNAVOX COMPANY Et Al., Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1976-06-14TSC INDUSTRIES, INC., Et Al. v. NORTHWAY, INC.Supreme Court of the United States 1976-01-22Libby G. LYNCH, Plaintiff, v. VICKERS ENERGY CORPORATION Et Al., DefendantsCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1975-01-20UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC., Defendant Below-Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. FRANCIS I. duPONT & CO., Et Al., Plaintiffs Below-Appellees and Cross-AppellantsSupreme Court of Delaware 1970-01-26MILLS Et Al. v. ELECTRIC AUTO-LITE CO. Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1968-12-24DAVID J. GREENE AND CO. Et Al., Plaintiffs, v. DUNHILL INTERNATIONAL, INC., and A. G. Spalding & Bros., Inc., DefendantsCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1966-06-03Esther R. Warshaw, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, vs. W. K. Calhoun, Charles F. Curry, F. W. Duboc, Ray B. Duboc, Robert M. Duboc, W. L. Gench, John Latshaw, K. H. Mead, C. C. Otto, Western Casualty and Surety Company, a Kansas Corporation, and the Western Insurance Securities Company, a Delaware Corporation, Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1965-08-02Application of Delaware Racing AssociationSupreme Court of Delaware 1965-05-04John B. JANIGAN, Defendant, Appellant, v. Frederick B. TAYLOR Et Al., Plaintiffs, AppelleesFirst Circuit 1960-03-24Felder v. Anderson, Clayton & Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware 1956-06-08Sporborg v. City Specialty StoresCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1943-02-01SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. CHENERY CORPORATION Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1909-05-03Strong v. RepideSupreme Court of the United States

22 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.