Quinn v. Press’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 federal appellate · 151 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 202 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ * * * the statute of limitation begins to run from the time the fraud is discovered, or could have been discovered by the defrauded party by the exercise of reasonable diligence.” (Emphasis ours.) Quinn v. Press, 135 Tex. 60 , 140 S.W.2d 438, 440 , 128 A.L.R. 757 (1940).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jim Walter Homes, Inc. v. Castillo · Polk Terrace, Inc. v. Curtis

2. “when an act is in itself lawful as to the person who bases an action on injuries subsequently accruing from, and consequent upon, the act, it is held that the cause of action does not accrue until the injury is sustained ... If, however, the act of which the injury was the natural sequence was a legal injury,- — by which is meant an injury giving a cause of action by reason of its being an invasion of a plaintiffs right, — then, be the damage however slight, limitation will run from the time the wrongful act was committed, and will bar an action for any damages resulting from the act, although these may not have been fully developed until within a period less than necessary to complete the bar.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Reed v. Carecentric National, LLC (In Re Soporex, Inc.) · Cal Fed Mortgage Co. v. Street

3. “You are instructed that the law recognizes a corporation as a legal entity separate and apart from its shareholders. You are further instructed that one of the purposes of a corporation is to shield shareholders from personal liability for the debts of the corporation, if the corporation is not used as a sham to perpetrate a fraud on creditors or is not used as the alter ego of the individual. QUESTION NO. 1 Do you find from a preponderance of the evidence that Houston Pipe & Supply Company was the alter ego of Harvey Rosen? Domination of corporate affairs by a sole stockholder or unity of interest do -not in themselves constitute alter ego. Alter ego exists when there is such unity between the corporation and the individual that the separateness of the corporation has ceased to exist and holding only the corporation liable would result in injustice. You are instructed that you must consider the total dealings of Houston Pipe & Supply Company and Harvey Rosen, including the degree to which corporate and individual property have been kept separate, the amount of financial interest, ownership and control, whether Houston Pipe & Supply Company has been used by Harvey Rosen for personal purposes and the degree to which corporate formalities have been followed. Answer “We do” or “We do not” Answer: We do QUESTION NO. 2 Do you find from a preponderance of the evidence that the operation of Houston Pipe & Supply Company by Harvey Rosen after the execution of the contract between Mat”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Rosen v. Matthews Const. Co., Inc.