Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 227 Minn. 217 - Rosenquist v. Baker

Rosenquist v. Baker’s Empirical Analysis

1948

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
2
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably Hanson v. Ford Motor Co. (1960), Clements Auto Company v. The Service Bureau Corporation (1971)

12 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

10019481950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Rockefeller v. Merritt · Humphrey v. Sievers · Reynolds v. Franklin · Nelson v. Berkner · Defiel v. Rosenberg

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

  1. ““Damages in an action for false representations and deceit are the natural and proximate loss sustained by the party because of reliance thereon. [Citing cases.] In cases where the fraud induced a purchase, the measure of damages is the difference in value between what was given and what was received.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The rule is that, where a party to a contract has partially performed it before discovering the falsity of the representation which induced him to enter into it, he is not obliged to retrace his steps, but may complete performance without waiving the fraud and then bring an action for damages for deceit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““It is well settled that the parol evidence rule is not applicable to exclude evidence of fraudulent oral representations by which one party induces another to enter a written contract, provided the representations were such that the other party might reasonably rely upon them.” 1”
    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.