Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 263 Ark. 202 - Carter v. Quick

Carter v. Quick’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
3
states following
November 2025
most recently cited

42 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently November 2025 · most notably O'MARA v. Dykema (1997), Taylor v. Richardson (1979)

42 state decisions

200197819801990200020102020decided

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 2 Ariz. App. 115 - Blecick v. School District No. 18 of Cochise County · Fox v. Webb · Garbis v. Apatoff · 28 Conn. Super. Ct. 476 - Vernali v. Centrella · 75 Ga. App. 307 - Kendrick v. White

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

  1. “It has been said that as a general rule the cost of correcting defects, rather than the difference in value, is the proper measure of damages where the correction would not involve unreasonable destruction of the work and the cost would not be grossly disproportionate to the results to be obtained. 13 Am. Jur. 2d 79, Building and Construction Contracts, Section 79. See also, 5 Corbin 491, Section 1089, where the author says that the cost of curing defects should be the measure whether the breach of the contract is large or small and that it should be applied to every case, except where the actual curing of the defects would cause unreasonable economic waste. . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “A substantial compliance by the contracter is all that is required under the law, he being charged (where there is a substantial compliance) with the difference in value between the work as done and as contracted to be done, or the replacement of defective work where this can be done without great expense or material injury to the structure as a whole.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Waiver of defects is a question of fact to be determined from the circumstances of the case .... “. . . Payment and occupancy together without more is not a waiver as a matter of law . . . .””
    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.