Rogers v. Meiser’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 17 state decisions

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

1. “"A. The purchaser may recover in a civil action only in the event of any of the following: 1. The failure of the seller to provide to the purchaser a disclaimer statement or a disclosure statement and any amendment prior to acceptance of an offer to purchase; 2. The failure of the seller to disclose in the disclosure statement or any amendment provided to the purchaser a defect which was actually known to the seller prior to acceptance of an offer to purchase; or ... B. The sole and exclusive civil remedy for a failure under subsection A of this section by the seller or the real estate licensee shall be an action for actual damages, including the cost of repairing the defect, suffered by the purchaser as a result of a defect existing in the property as of the date of acceptance by the seller of an offer to purchase and shall not include the remedy of exemplary damages.... F. This act applies to, regulates and determines rights, duties, obligations and remedies of the seller, the real estate licensee and the purchaser with respect to disclosure of defects in property."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. White v. HENG LY LIM

2. “The elements of common law fraud are: 1) a false material misrepresentation, 2) made as a positive assertion which is either known to be false, or made recklessly without knowledge of the truth, 3) with the intention that it be acted upon, and 4) which is relied on by the other party to his/her own detriment. Gay v. Akin , 1988 OK 150, ¶ 7, 766 P.2d 985,989; D & H Co., Inc. v. Shultz , 1978 OK 71, ¶ 11, 579 P.2d 821, 824; Ramsey v. Fowler , 1957 OK 61, 308 P.2d 654, Syllabus by the Court . Fraud is never presumed and it must be proved by clear and convincing evidence. Brown v. Founders Bank and Trust Co. , 1994 OK 130, ¶ 12, n.17, 890 P.2d 855, 862.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO THE OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS

3. “The Act, in major part then, expands the liability of sellers where no liability would exist at common law via an actual fraud theory because the buyer's reliance on misrepresentation or failure to speak on the seller's part is viewed as unjustifiable or unreasonable given the open/patent nature of a particular defect, whether or not the buyer actually noticed, saw or was aware of the defect, where the buyer conducted an unimpeded inspection of the property. . another purpose of the Act is limiting the remedy available to a buyer and providing a certain amount of immunity to a seller.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2008 OK CIV APP 97 - Lester v. Smith