Bankers Trust Company, a Corporation v. Pacific Employers Insurance Company, a Corporation, and the Century Insurance Company, Limited, a Corporation’s Empirical Analysis
282 F.2d 106 · 1960
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 7 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably United States v. Georgia-Pacific Co. (1970), 685 So. 2d 1238 - HTP, Ltd. v. Lineas Aereas Costarricenses (1996)
29 federal appellate · 7 district · 24 state decisions
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 Baltimore Co v. Phillips · 130 Cal. App. 2d 24 - Bohn v. Watson · Royal Insurance v. Stewart · United States v. Pan-American Petroleum Co.
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A right of action on a contract and for fraud in inducing plaintiff to enter into such contract may exist at the same time, and a recovery on one of the causes will not bar a subsequent action on the other.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage“If the intention to waive is implied from conduct, the conduct should speak the intention clearly.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“However, this doctrine of election of remedies applies only to choosing between different remedies allowed by law on the same state of facts, where the party has but one cause of action, one right infringed, one wrong to be redressed. ‘The doctrine does not require election between distinct causes of action arising out of separate and distinct facts.’ It is the law that one who has been fraudulently induced into a contract may elect to stand by that contract and sue for damages for the fraud.... The same basic transaction gives rise to distinct and independent causes of action which may be consecutively pursued to satisfaction. ‘Thus an action on contract induced by fraud is not inconsistent with an action for damages for the deceit; * * ‘A right of action on a contract and for fraud in inducing plaintiff to enter into such a contract may exist at the same time, and a recovery on one of the causes will not bar a subsequent action on the other.’ (citations omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wang v. Wang
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.