ZAPATA CORPORATION, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. William MALDONADO, Plaintiff Below, Appellee

1981-05-13 · Supreme Court of Delaware · United States

read the judgment

2What it rests on

2Relied 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.

19841 judgments19851 judgments

2 judgments have relied on it, across 1984–1985

first 1984 · last 1985 · busiest 1984 (1 judgments)

1985-03-14Alden SMITH and John W. Gosselin, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. Jerome W. VAN GORKOM, Bruce S. Chelberg, William B. Johnson, Joseph B. Lanterman, Graham J. Morgan, Thomas P. O’Boyle, W. Allen Wallis, Sidney H. Bonser, William D. Browder, Trans Union Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, Marmon Group, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, GL Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and New T. Co., a Delaware Corporation, Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1984-03-01Senior ARONSON, Et Al., Defendants Below, Appellants, v. Harry LEWIS, Plaintiff Below, AppelleeSupreme Court of Delaware

What it rests on

1971-10-20John PUMA, Plaintiff, v. J. Willard MARRIOTT Et Al., DefendantsCourt of Chancery 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

17 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.