Pasadena State Bank v. Isaac’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 130 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 142 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably Thomas v. Oldham (1995), Gulf States Utilities Co. v. Low (2002)
9 federal appellate · 130 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston))
Relationships
Relies on Chicago, R. I. & G. Ry. Co. v. Zumwalt · Chase Bag Co. v. Longoria · Dallas Railway & Terminal Co. v. Strickland Transp. Co. · Tinney v. Williams · Texas Power & Light Co. v. Hale
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 142 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where a person is entitled to a judgment for harm to chattels not amounting to a total destruction in value, the damages include compensation for “(a) the difference between the value of the chattel before the harm and the value after the harm or, at the plaintiffs election, the reasonable cost of repair or restoration where feasible, with due allowance for any difference between the original value and the value after repairs, and “(b) the loss of use. * * * ” One can (the owner) “recover only the difference in its value before and after the harm, except that if, after the harm, it appears to be economical to repair the chattel, he can elect to recover the cost of repairs, together with the value of the loss of use during the repairs, or other losses which may have resulted during such time.” (emphasis added)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The basic reason underlying rules for the ascertainment of damages for any tortious act is a fair, reasonable, and proper compensation for the injury inflicted as a proximate result of the wrongful act complained of. The general rule for measuring damages to personal property is the difference in the market value immediately before and immediately after the injury to such property at the place where the damage was occasioned. This principle of law is of such universal application that it would be trite to cite authorities from the many jurisdictions that follow the rule. See annotations in 169 A.L.R., p. 1075, et seq."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““. . . In cases where the damaged personal property is susceptible of repairs the owner of the injured property may recover the reasonable costs of such replacements and repairs as are necessary to restore the damaged article to its condition immediately prior to the accident.”
2 later decisions 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.