Miller v. Porter’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Porter knew that Miller could not support himself and wife and also make the required contract payments . unless the farm revenue was $400 per month; and Porter represented that it was that amount. With that material fact misrepresented by Porter and relied on by Miller, the case at bar is ruled by our holdings in Fausett & Co. v. Bullard, 217 Ark. 176 , 229 S.W.2d 490, 491 , and Kotz v. Rush, 218 Ark. 692 , 238 S.W.2d 634 (opinion delivered March 19, 1951). In Fausett & Co. v. Bullard, supra, we said: ‘There are many circumstances that justify the buyer in acting upon the seller’s statements, even though there is an opportunity to discover their falsity. * * * ’ Citing Brown v. Le May, 101 Ark. 95 , 141 S.W. 759 , and Myers v. Martin, 168 Ark. 1028 , 272 S.W. 856 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. De Boer v. Dykes