GETTY OIL COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. SKELLY OIL COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant Below, Appellee; SKELLY OIL COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant Below, Appellee and Cross-Appellant, v. GETTY OIL COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff Below, Appellant and Cross-Appellee

1970-06-01 · Supreme Court of Delaware · United States

read the judgment

7What it rests on

6Relied 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.

19711 judgments6 years silent19772 judgments6 years silent19831 judgments19841 judgments19851 judgments

6 judgments have relied on it, across 1971–1985

first 1971 · last 1985 · busiest 1977 (2 judgments)

1985-05-09Emanuel G. ROSENBLATT, Joseph Gruss, Carolyn Skelly Burford, Et Al., Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. GETTY OIL COMPANY, Defendant Below, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware 1984-03-01Senior ARONSON, Et Al., Defendants Below, Appellants, v. Harry LEWIS, 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 1977-10-18Michael D. TANZER and Deborah Tanzer, as Trustees of Tanzer Economic Associates, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. INTERNATIONAL GENERAL INDUSTRIES, INC., Et Al., Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1977-05-10TRANS WORLD AIRLINES, INC., Plaintiff, v. SUMMA CORPORATION and William R. Lummis, Delaware Ancillary Administrator of the Estate of Howard R. Hughes, DefendantsCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1971-06-18SINCLAIR OIL CORPORATION, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. Francis S. LEVIEN, Plaintiff Below, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware

What it rests on

1969-07-31Harry BASTIAN, Jarlath W. Brady and Edwin Mulcahy, in Their Own Right and as Representatives of All Other Stockholders of Chicago Aerial Industries, Inc. Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. BOURNS, INC., a Corporation of the State of California and Bourns C. A. I., Inc., a Corporation of the State of Delaware and Chicago Aerial Industries, Inc., a Corporation of the State of Delaware, DefendantsCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1969-04-08Samuel C. WOLFENSOHN and Esther Buchman, in Their Own Behalf and in Behalf of All Other Holders of Certificates Constituting a Charge on Income, and All Other Holders of 5½ Percent Subordinated Income Debentures, Due January 1, 2033, of the Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. MADISON FUND, INC., Axe-Houghton Fund A, Inc., Axe-Houghton Fund B, Inc., Axe-Houghton Stock Fund, Inc., Axe Science Corp., Bangor Punta Operations, Inc., Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company and Katy Industries, Inc., Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 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 1967-07-27Meyer M. MEYERSON, Plaintiff, v. EL PASO NATURAL GAS COMPANY and Northwest Production Corporation, DefendantsCourt of Chancery of Delaware 1963-04-05Abelow v. Midstates Oil CorporationSupreme Court of Delaware 1957-12-10The American Hardware Corporation, a Connecticut Corporation, and B. S. F. Company, a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, vs. Savage Arms Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant-AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware 1952-11-18Robert D. Sterling, Ruth L. Sterling, Edward Sterling, Oliver Sterling, Elizabeth Parks Sterling, Realty Investing Company, Cathedral Estates, Inc., Charles Kimmelman, Milton A. Kimmelman, Allenhurst Realties, Inc., Rhinelander Improvement Co., Inc., Helen Kimmelman, Ida Kimmelman, Alma S. Porter and Ruth S. Frost, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, vs. Mayflower Hotel Corporation and Hilton Hotels Corporation, Each a Corporation of the State of Delaware, Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware

1 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.