Schutzman v. Gill

How courts have described this case

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

• “If the plaintiff was guilty of any material breach of his employment contract, he may not enforce its provisions against the defendant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In Re Teligent, Inc.
  S.D. New York· 2001-10-29· cited 28×
• Gulick v. A. Robert Strawn & Associates, Inc.
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 1970-12-01· cited 12×
• Rosenbloom v. Adams, Scott & Conway, Inc.
  S.D. New York· 1981-09-02· cited 11×
• Ranger Nationwide, Inc. v. National Indemnity Co.
  D. Delaware· 1987-03-26· cited 6×
• Physiotherapy Corp. v. Samuel Moncure, III
  Court of Chancery of Delaware· 2018-03-12
• Troy Ventures, LLC v. Mark Kosloski
  Superior Court of Delaware· 2025-04-21

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Willard F. Deputy & Co v. Hastings
  Superior Court of Delaware· 1923-10-12· cited 20×
• Capital Bakers, Inc. v. Leahy
  Court of Chancery of Delaware· 1935-05-10· cited 18×
• Schutzman v. Gill
  Court of Chancery of Delaware· 1959-08-27· cited 3×

Other cases named Schutzman v. Gill

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Schutzman v. Gill
  Court of Chancery of Delaware· 1959-08-27· cited 3×