Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 29 WIS2D 653 - Hartwig v. Bitter

Hartwig v. Bitter’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

78
cited by 78 later decisions
1
states following
October 2017
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 2 district · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently October 2017 · most notably 124 Wis. 2d 175 - Lundin v. Shimanski (1985), 150 Wis. 2d 80 - U.S. Oil Co. v. Midwest Auto Care Services, Inc. (1989)

19 federal appellate · 2 district · 26 state decisions

310196619701980199020002010decided

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 Anderson v. Tri-State Home Improvement Co. · J. H. Clark Co. v. Rice · Beers v. Atlas Assurance Co. · Zingale v. Mills Novelty Co. · Alropa Corp. v. Flatley

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

  1. ““ ‘A statement of opinion in a business transaction upon facts not disclosed or otherwise known to the recipient may reasonably be interpreted as an implied statement that the maker knows of no fact incompatible with his opinion. . . .”’ Id. at 150, citing Restatement, 3 Torts, sec. 539 at 91. (Emphasis added.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““... a cause of action must be viewed as a grouping of facts falling into a single unit or occurrence as a lay person would view them. This grouping of facts consists of ‘the defendant’s wrongful act.’ ” Caygill v. Ipsen, supra, 582; accord: Hartwig v. Bitter, 29 Wis.2d 653, 660 , 189 N.W.2d 644 (1966).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““ ‘Ordinarily a prediction as to events to occur in the future is to be regarded as a statement of opinion only, on which the adverse party has no right to rely.’ ” Hartwig v. Bitter, 29 Wis. 2d 653, 657 , 139 N.W.2d 644 (1966), quoting Prosser, Law of Torts, sec. 104 at 744 (hornbook series, 3d ed.).”
    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.