Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 254 Ala. 323 - Fitzpatrick v. Shine

Fitzpatrick v. Shine’s Empirical Analysis

1950

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
November 1972
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently November 1972

8 state decisions

60195019601970decided

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 Forest Hill Corp. v. Latter & Blum, Inc. · Ray v. Richardson · Brasher v. First Nat. Bank of Birmingham · Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. James · Williams v. Williams

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

  1. ““ * * * The demurrer, we think, misapprehends the theory of the bill. It is not grounded upon actual misrepresentation leading to the execution of an intended instrument. It is, rather, that defendant, in whom complainant reposed the utmost confidence, was requested to prepare a paper to a specified intent and impliedly consented to do so, but in fact prepared a paper to ^ wholly different intent, which intent he concealed from complainant, and procured his signature thereto. Such a bill presents a case of actionable fraud, cognizable in a court of equity. * * ””
    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.