Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 30 Utah 2d 183 - Howarth v. Ostergaard

30 Utah 2d 183 - Howarth v. Ostergaard’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
2
states following
May 2014
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently May 2014 · most notably Mueller v. Abdnor (1992), First Security Bank of Utah, N.A. v. J.B.J. Feedyards, Inc. (1982)

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 32 state decisions

16019731980199020002010decided

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 Eastman Kodak Co of New York v. Southern Photo Materials Co · 6 Utah 2d 187 - Gould v. Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. · Barnett v. Hitching Post Lodge, Inc. · 18 Utah 2d 122 - Super Tire Market, Inc. v. Rollins · 15 Utah 2d 367 - Van Zyverden v. Farrar

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

  1. “The basic and general rule is that loss of anticipated profits of a business venture involve so many factors of uncertainty that ordinarily profits to be realized in the future are too speculative to base an award of damages thereon. The other side of the coin is that damages to a business or enterprise need only be proved with sufficient certainty that reasonable minds might believe from a preponderance of the evidence that the damages were actually suffered.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “affirmatively shown that the wrong was done with an intent to injure, vex or annoy, or because of hatred, spite or ill will.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the filing of an instrument in good faith, though mistaken, is not actionable as slander of title.”
    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.