Lo Frese v. Hayes’s Empirical Analysis
240 F.2d 277 · 1957
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently September 2006
1 federal appellate · 2 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 Stokes v. Victory Land Co. · Wheeler v. Baars · Watson v. Jones · Ramey v. Koons · Huffstetler v. Our Home Life Insurance
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.
“[E]very person must use reasonable diligence for his own protection. Under any standard of conduct, and in the absence of accompanying actual deception, artifice, or misconduct, it is well agreed that where the means of knowledge are at hand and are equally available to both parties, and the subject matter is equally open to inspection, if one of them does not avail himself of those means ... he will not be heard to say that he was deceived by the other’s misrepresentations.”
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.