Alena Lank, William D. Lank, Sarah L. Marsh and Anne W. Westphal, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, vs. Edmund F. Steiner, Elsie L. Steiner and the President, Directors and Company of the Farmers Bank of the State of Delaware, a Corporation of the State of Delaware, Administrator Cum Testamento Annexo of the Estate of John C. Lank, Deceased, Defendants Below, Appellees; William D. Lank, Administrator of the Estate of Alena Lank, Deceased, Defendant Below, Appellant, vs. Edmund F. Steiner and Elsie L. Steiner, His Wife, Plaintiffs Below, Appellees

1966-10-24 · Supreme Court of Delaware · United States

read the judgment

3What it rests on

3Relied 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.

19771 judgments6 years silent19831 judgments9 years silent19921 judgments

3 judgments have relied on it, across 1977–1992

first 1977 · last 1992 · busiest 1977 (1 judgments)

1992-04-09W.B. Dixon STROUD, Jr., Morris W. Stroud, Agnes S. Peele, and Anne S. Bradford, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. J. Peter GRACE, Dr. George C. Dacey, Dr. T.J. Malone, Roger Milliken, H.W. Jockers, Dr. H. Keith Brodie, Minot K. Milliken, F.G. Rogers, Rene C. McPherson, Gerrish H. Milliken, and Milliken & Company, a Delaware Corporation, Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1983-02-01William B. WEINBERGER, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. UOP, INC., Et Al., Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1977-10-18Libby G. LYNCH, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. VICKERS ENERGY CORPORATION Et Al., Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware

What it rests on

1965-08-02Application of Delaware Racing AssociationSupreme Court of Delaware 1965-04-20DANIEL F. NARDO, WILLIAM v. NARDO, WILLIAM J. NARDO and NICOLA NARDO, a Minor, by His Father and Natural Guardian, FLORE A. NARDO, Contestants Below, Appellants, v. JOSEPHINE C. NARDO, Proponent Below, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware 1909-05-03Strong v. RepideSupreme Court of the United States

4 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.