Stonemets v. Head’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 41 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Courts generally recognize that where parties do not stand on an equal footing of opportunity and knowledge a positive assertion of a matter, which stated in another form, might be a mere opinion, may when false and fraudulent be actionable if the statement was a material inducement to the trade or sale. So a statement of an opinion under like circumstances when in* fact the party has no such opinion, or has a contrary opinion, may become a statement of a material fact, to wit, the fact that an opinion exists. ’ ’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 59 Cal. App. 743 - Hall v. Mitchell

2. ““It will suffice to say that, when a statement concerning a subject-matter of a transaction, which might otherwise be only an expression of opinion, is affirmed as an existing fact material to the transaction and reasonably induces the other party to- consider and rely upon it as a fact, the statement then becomes an affirmation of fact within the meaning of the general rule as to fraudulent representations.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dye v. Farm Mortgage Inv. Co.

3. “Fraud is kaleidoscopic, infinite. Fraud being infinite and taking on protean form at will, were courts to cramp themselves by defining it with a hard and fast definition, their jurisdiction would be cunningly circumvented at once by new schemes beyond the definition.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Abbott Laboratories