Interstate Freeway Services, Inc. v. Houser’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably Larimore v. State (1994), Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Davis (2002)
10 federal appellate · 36 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 Ray Dodge, Inc. v. Moore · Moore Ford Co. v. Smith · Brookside Village Mobile Homes v. Meyers · Berger v. Security Pacific Information Systems, Inc. · Morris v. Valley Forge Insurance
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Two measures of general damages are generally applied in actions for fraud in recognition of the underlying elements of both tort and contract in those actions. The first measure is the benefit of the bargain measure, in which the injured party is entitled to the difference between the value of the property, business, or chattel as represented and its actual value at the time of the purchase. In essence, the injured party would receive his expectation. The second measure is the out-of-pocket measure, in which the injured party is to be made whole by being restored to the position he was in prior to the injury; this measure provides for the difference between the purchase price and the actual value of the goods received. H. Brill, Arkansas Law of Damages, 35-37 (1990).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(1) a false representation of a material fact; (2) knowledge or belief on the part of the person making the representation that the representation is false; (3) an intent to induce the other party to act or refrain from acting in reliance on the misrepresentation; (4) a justifiable reliance by the other party; and (5) resulting damages.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. O'MARA v. Dykema“conduct which is malicious, wanton, in violation of a relationship of trust or confidence, or which is done with deliberate intent to injure another.”
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.