Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 192 FSUPP 879 - Hardt v. Brink

Hardt v. Brink’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
19
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably 56 Ill. App. 3d 338 - Pittway Corp. v. American Motorists Insurance (1977), 155 Wis. 2d 674 - Nelson v. Davidson (1990)

6 federal appellate · 34 state decisions — followed in 19 states

160196119701980199020002010decided

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 57 Wash. 2d 203 - Mattieligh v. Poe · 38 Wash. 2d 370 - Roberts v. Sunnen

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

  1. “[n]o affirmative duty to advise is assumed by the mere creation of an agency relationship.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[e]ach case must be decided on its own peculiar facts.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Whether defendant intended to act as a consultant and counselor as well as a solicitor of insurance is not clear. But it is clear that through the designations on his letterheads and the stickers he attached to policies issued by his office defendant held himself out to be an insurance expert. Under the evidence I am convinced that by his conduct and business practices defendant permitted a reasonable inference to be drawn by his customers, such as plaintiff, that he was a person highly skilled as an insurance advisor and that plaintiff relied upon him as such. Under these circumstances defendant assumed a duty to advise plaintiff as to his insurance needs in connection with his business, particularly where such needs have been brought to defendant's attention.”
    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.