Brough v. Foley

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “The plaintiffs were, in substance, strangers to those transactions and were given no rights under the contract to challenge the transactions.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Stuart Kingston, Inc. v. Robinson
  Supreme Court of Delaware· 1991-08-12· cited 82×
• Walter J. Mruk, Jr. v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Rhode Island· 2013-12-19· cited 53×
• Bortolotti v. Hayden
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2007-05-21· cited 42×
• Brough v. Foley
  Supreme Court of Rhode Island· 1990-04-04· cited 31×
• Greenhall Investments, L.L.C. v. Wiese Development Corp.
  Nebraska Court of Appeals· 2005-11-08· cited 29×
• DePetrillo v. Belo Holdings, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Rhode Island· 2012-06-11· cited 6×
• Cosajay v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
  D. Rhode Island· 2013-11-05· cited 4×
• Fenster v. Dechabert
  Superior Court of The Virgin Islands· 2016-08-08· cited 3×
• Kriegel v. Mortgage Electronic
  Superior Court of Rhode Island· 2011-10-13

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Neustadt v. Pearce
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1958-07-01· cited 20×
• Smerchek v. Hamilton
  Court of Appeals of Kansas· 1980-02-15· cited 17×
• Martin v. Prairie Rod & Gun Club
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1976-05-31· cited 17×
• Smith v. VanVoorhis
  West Virginia Supreme Court· 1982-10-15· cited 16×
• Ross v. Ponemon
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1970-03-10· cited 15×
• Watergate Corporation v. Reagan
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1975-09-26· cited 13×
• Estate of Johnson v. Carr
  Supreme Court of Arkansas· 1985-07-01· cited 12×