Basnight v. Diamond Developers, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1601 (§ 102 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1635 (§ 125 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1640 (§ 130 of the Truth in Lending Act)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Improvement Company v. Munson · Anderson Bros. Ford v. Valencia · Dickens v. Puryear
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.
“because ... Plaintiff has not presented any set of facts establishing that she is entitled to actual damages, Plaintiff may only recover the statutory penalty as a result of Diamond Developers' TILA violation”); Krajci v. Mt. Vernon Consumer Discount Co., 16 B.R. 464, 466 (E.D.Pa.1981) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“unless the entire record shows a right to judgment with such clarity as to leave no room for controversy and establishes affirmatively that the adverse party cannot prevail under any circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“`(1) an unfair or deceptive act or practice, or unfair method of competition, (2) in or affecting commerce, and (3) which proximately caused actual injury to the plaintiff or his business.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.