Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 253 F.2d 36 - Sidney J. Brown v. James R. Coates, Marion E. Coates, and Margaret E. Brown

Sidney J. Brown v. James R. Coates, Marion E. Coates, and Margaret E. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

253 F.2d 36 · 1958

Citation profile

97
cited by 97 later decisions
15
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 17 district · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 97 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Ward v. Taggart (1959), St. Paul at Chase Corp. v. Manufacturers Life Insurance (1971)

20 federal appellate · 17 district · 40 state decisions — followed in 15 states

2701958196019701980199020002010decided

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 Stern v. Board of Levee Commissioners · Scott v. Donald · Day v. Woodworth · Wright v. Everett · 35 Cal. 2d 713 - Steiner v. Rowley

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

  1. “[Ojnce it has been shown that one trained and experienced holds himself out to the public as worthy to be trusted for hire to perform services for others, and those so invited do place their trust and confidence, and that trust is intentionally and consciously disregarded ... community protection, as well as that of the victim, warrants the imposition of punitive damages.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'in certain, narrowly defined circumstances, where a breach of contract merges with, and assumes the character of, a willful tort, calculated rather than inadvertent, flagrant, and in disregard of obligations of trust.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We believe the better view to be that in certain, narrowly defined circumstances, where a breach of contract merges with, and assumes the character of, a willful tort, calculated rather than inadvertent, flagrant, and in disregard of obligations of trust punitive damages may be assessed. In this view we are by no means alone. That punitive damages have a proper place in a civil case as a punishment of, and as a deterrent to, various forms of wrongful behavior has long been recognized by the federal courts including this court. [Footnotes omitted].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.