Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 310 S.C. 408 - Goddard v. Fairways Development General Partnership

Goddard v. Fairways Development General Partnership’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
4
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently March 2019

22 state decisions

120199320002010decided

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 SSI Medical Services, Inc. v. Cox · Raven's Cove Townhomes, Inc. v. Knuppe Development Co. · Island Car Wash, Inc. v. Norris · DOCKSIDE ASSO., INC. v. Detyens · C & S Real Estate Services, Inc. v. Massengale

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

  1. “[O]ur Supreme Court held that the promoters of a corporation are fiduciaries to each other and to the corporation they are creating. Here, we think there is a corollary between the promoters of a corporation and the developers of a PUD. Both are entrusted by interested investors to bring about a viable organization to serve a specific function. Both should be expected to use good judgment and act in utmost good faith to complete the formation of their organizations.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In a dispute between the directors of a homeowners association * and aggrieved homeowners, the conduct of the directors should be judged by the 'business judgment rule' and absent a showing of bad faith , dishonesty, or incompetence, the judgment of the directors will not be set aside by judicial action.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Assuming a fiduciary relationship exists between the appellants and respondents because of their superior voting power , it is clear that the respondents have refrained from exercising their superior voting strength to effectuate higher assessments in deference to the wishes of the appellants to keep the assessments low.”
    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.