Hubbard v. Elam’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

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

1. ““What appears to be the modem, and we think the better, rule relative to recision for a unilateral mistake, is well stated in 13 Am.Jur.2d, Cancellation of Instruments § 32 which reads: ‘Equity will relieve a party from a unilateral mistake that was a result of fraud or duress or was accompanied by other special facts creating an independent equity on behalf of the mistaken person, such as inequitable conduct of the other party, but cancellation should not be decreed against a party whose conduct did not contribute to or induce the mistake and who will obtain no unconscionable advantage therefrom.’ In Hubbert v. Fagen, 99 Ark. 480 , 138 S.W. 1001 , the Court quoted with approval the following: ‘Where relief is given because of the mistake of one party alone, it is where it is induced by the conduct of the other party, or because the other seeks unconscionably to take advantage of it, and the ground of jurisdiction is really fraud.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Centex Construction Co. v. James