Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2 COLO 532 - Sellar v. Clelland

Sellar v. Clelland’s Empirical Analysis

1875

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
4
states following
August 2005
most recently cited

1 district · 25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently August 2005 · most notably Morrison v. Goodspeed (1937), 228 F. Supp. 757 - Trussell v. United Underwriters, Ltd. (1964)

1 district · 25 state decisions

6018751880189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Bennett v. . Judson · Wintz v. Morrison · Eames v. Morgan · Harris v. Plant & Co. · Durst v. . Burton

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

  1. ““In regard to representations generally, I conceive it to be necessary for the party relying on the representations to show not only that they are false, but that the party making the same knew them to be false. But when one has made a representation positively, or professing to speak as of his own knowledge on the subject, the intentional falsehood is disclosed, and the intention to deceive is also inferred, or at all events, this is so when the matters falsely represented are peculiarly within the knowledge of the party making them, and are not known to the party to whom they are made. In such a case, the proof would seem to be complete when it was shown that the defendants made the representations; that they were made to induce plaintiffs to enter into the contract; that, relying upon the same, they did enter into the contract; that the representations were false; that the plaintiffs sustained damage, and that such damage was occasioned by reason of the falsity of such representations.” (Citing a large number of cases.)”
    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.