2 Conn. App. 294 - Kavarco v. T. J. E., Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 5 district · 236 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 252 later decisions — most recently April 2013 · most notably Citino v. Redevelopment Agency (1998), Wellington Systems, Inc. v. Redding Group, Inc. (1998)
9 federal appellate · 5 district · 236 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 Lopinto v. Haines · Pacelli Bros. Transportation, Inc. v. Pacelli · Paiva v. Vanech Heights Construction Co. · Dacey v. Connecticut Bar Assn. · J. Frederick Scholes Agency v. Mitchell
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 252 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“assuming the truth of the allegations in the complaint, the relief sought could not be legally awarded to the plaintiff.”
27 later decisions quote this exact passage“Rescission, simply stated, is the unmaking of a contract. It is a renouncement of the contract and any property obtained pursuant to the contract, and places the parties, as nearly as possible, in the same situation as existed just prior to the execution of the contract.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) That a false representation was made as to a statement of material fact; (2) that it was false and known to be false by the party making it; (3) that it was made to induce the other party to rely upon representations; and (4) that the party, in fact, acted upon the false representations to its detriment.”
5 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.