Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 310 S.W.2d 398 - Sawyer v. Willis

Sawyer v. Willis’s Empirical Analysis

1958

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
March 1983
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 1983

2 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

501958196019701980decided

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 Weaver v. Benson · 33 Tex. Civ. App. 520 - St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Smith · Weaver v. Benson · Caswell v. Satterwhite · 30 Tex. Civ. App. 426 - Fort Worth & Denver City Railway Co. v. Lock

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

  1. ““It is settled that an offer of compromise and settlement of a pending controversy is not admissible in evidence. McCormick & Ray, Law of Evidence, 2d Ed., Vol. 2, p. 29, Sec. 1142. However, as to what constitutes an offer of compromise and settlement coming within the rule, in some cases presents no small difficulty, but it is clear that the offer must not represent the party’s actual claim, but rather what he is willing to give or take to avoid the annoyance of litigation. Moreover, it seems clear that there must have been a dispute between the parties prior to the making of the offer. In this case the record fails to show any previous dispute. The record shows that appellee rendered the services and sent a bill for his fee and nothing more. The letter on its face shows the amount appellee claimed to be due at that time. The letter does not come within the rule excluding evidence of offers of compromise and settlement. Neither the letter nor the evidence in the case shows that by said letter appellee was making a concession for the sake of peace.” 310 S.W.2d at 399 .”
    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.