Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 145 S.W.2d 632 - Dillard v. Clutter

Dillard v. Clutter’s Empirical Analysis

1940

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
March 1979
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 1979

8 state decisions

501940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Wright v. Davenport · Boles v. Aldridge · Fetzer v. Haralson · 36 Tex. Civ. App. 78 - Jesse French Piano & Organ Co. v. Thomas · Potter v. Mobley

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"There is no general rule of law better established in this State than that, in the absence of fraud or an express agreement to take back an article or property sold under a warranty, the vendee cannot return the article and recover back all of the purchase money or that part of it which he has paid. (citing cases). The only condition under which a buyer has the right of rescission by reason of the warranty of the seller, in the absence of fraud or an agreement for a rescission, is where the article or property purchased proves wholly unsuitable for the use or purpose to which it is known by the seller that the buyer intends to place it, or the identity of the article and it proves to be something other than that which was purchased. In that event it may be returned and the contract of purchase rescinded upon an agreement of warranty. * * *" (emphasis supplied).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.