Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 154 MICH 23 - Aldrich v. Scribner

Aldrich v. Scribner’s Empirical Analysis

1908

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
8
states following
August 2016
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. J. D. Pittman Tractor Co. (1943), E. & F. Construction Co. v. Town of Stamford (1932)

1 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

100190819101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Converse v. Blumrich · Beebe v. Knapp · Holcomb v. Noble · Starkweather v. Benjamin · Busch v. Wilcox

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

  1. ““An equally careful examination of the cases adjudicated in this State satisfies me that the doctrine is settled here, by a long line of cases, that if there was in fact a misrepresentation, though made innocently, and its deceptive influence was effective, the consequences to the plaintiff being as serious as though it had proceeded from a vicious purpose, he would have a right of action for the damages caused thereby either at law or in equity.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “... The law would be justly subject to reproach if it afforded no redress in such a case. In Michigan the law does give redress in such a case, and that redress may be obtained in an action for fraud. It may seem somewhat unjust to characterize such conduct as fraudulent, but the court was apparently placed in the dilemma of either so characterizing it or of altogether denying compensation, and it chose the least objectionable of these two alternatives. ...”
    1 later decision 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.