Wink v. Wink’s Empirical Analysis
1943
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 2004
11 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.
Relationships
Relies on Boyd v. Eikenberry · Miller v. State ex rel. Abney · Commonwealth Bonding & Casualty Ins. Co. v. Meeks · Boyd v. Eikenberry
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The rule is thus stated: ‘For- frauds and misrepresentations of his agent within the scope of the employment, the principal is liable no less than in other cases, and this although he had no knowledge thereof, and has received no benefit therefrom.’ Boyd v. Eikenberry, Tex.Civ.App., 99 S.W.2d 701, 703 , modified by the Commission of Appeals, 132 Tex. 408 , 122 S.W.2d 1045 ; 21 R.C.L. 85. See also Commonwealth Bonding & Casualty Ins. Co. v. Meeks, Tex.Civ.App., 187 S.W. 681 , writ refused; 20 Tex.Jur. p. 97, § 62.””
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.