Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 197 SO2D 556 - Sutton v. Cast-Crete Corp.

Sutton v. Cast-Crete Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
July 2006
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 2006

4 state decisions

3019671970198019902000decided

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 Langley v. Irons Land & Development Co. · Peace River Phosphate Mining Co. v. Thomas A. Green, Inc. · Robson Link & Co. v. Leedy Wheeler & Co. · 69 So. 2d 331 - Loeffler v. Roe · Jones v. Walter C. Hardesty, Inc.

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

  1. ““Innocent Misrepresentation of Fact. According to the weight of authority, misrepresentation of material facts, although innocently made, if acted on by the other party to his detriment, will constitute a sufficient ground for rescission and cancellation in equity. The real inquiry is not whether the party making the representation knew it to be false, but whether the other party believed it to be true and was misled by it in making the contract; and, whether the misrepresentation is made innocently or knowingly, the effect is the same. It is as conclusive a ground of relief in equity as a willful and false assertion, for it operates as a surprise and imposition on the other party; and in such case the party must be held to his representations.””
    2 later decisions 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.