Rutledge v. Dodenhoff’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 55 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently August 2011 · most notably ELDERKIN Et Ux. v. Gaster (1972), Kennedy v. Columbia Lumber & Manufacturing Co. (1989)
3 federal appellate · 55 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Rogers v. Scyphers · Patterson v. Orangeburg Fertilizer Co. · Frasher v. Cofer
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The rationale of the decisions which hold the builder-vendor of a new house liable on the basis of an implied warranty is that the seller and buyer are not on an equal footing in such a transaction.... [T]he primary purpose of the transaction is to provide the purchaser with a habitable dwelling and the transfer of the land is secondary. The seller holds himself out as an expert in such construction and the prospective purchaser, if he buys, is forced to a large extent to rely on the skill of the builder. This is true because the ordinary purchaser is precluded from making a knowledgeable inspection of the completed house not only because of the expense and his unfamiliarity with building construction, but also because the defects are usually hidden rendering inspection practically impossible. Under such circumstances, the purchaser is at the mercy of the builder-vendor.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“that the house was built in a reasonably workmanlike manner and is reasonably suitable for habitation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[Defendants contend that they installed the septic tank and field drains therefrom in accordance with the specifications of the Greenville County Health Department and that such fact should relieve them from liability. The short answer to the foregoing contention is that this action for breach of an implied warranty is not based on negligence. There was an implied warranty which bound the defendants absolutely for the existence of the warranted qualities in the building, irrespective of any fault on their part.”
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.