McNabb v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
190 F.2d 608 · 1951
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 10 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably United States v. Brown (1996), Howard v. Riggs National Bank (1981)
10 federal appellate · 10 district · 5 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 Southern Development Co of Nevada v. Silva · Graffam v. Burgess · Farnsworth v. Duffner · United States v. Rowe · Wynne v. Boone
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““True, the law still recognizes that in bargaining parties will puff their wares in terms which neither side means seriously, and which either so takes at his peril * * *; but it is no longer law that declarations of value can never be a fraud. Like other words, they get their color from their setting, and mean one thing when exchanged between traders, and another when uttered by a broker to his customer. Values are facts as much as anything else * * (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““[A] statement [as to value] when ‘made under conditions which show that it was intended’ by one uttering it ‘to be treated as an immediate factor inducing action, and was made with knowledge that it would be accepted as a basis of action, instead of a mere element to be investigated before action, * * * becomes for all practical purposes a statement of fact.’ ” 190 F.2d at 610 (footnotes omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“But we do not think that this case must depend upon the merits of Thomas’s representation of value. Even if made and if considered material, thereby giving rise to the presumption that it induced the action complained of, there is ample evidence in the record to rebutt that presumption and to support the trial judge’s finding that McNabb did not, in fact, rely thereon.”
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.