Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 312 U.S. 410 - Equitable Life Insurance v. Halsey, Stuart & Co.

Equitable Life Insurance v. Halsey, Stuart & Co.’s Empirical Analysis

312 U.S. 410 · 1941

Citation profile

81
cited by 81 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
December 1998
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 6 district · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 81 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1998 · most notably Thomas v. State (1984), 228 F. Supp. 757 - Trussell v. United Underwriters, Ltd. (1964)

13 federal appellate · 6 district · 28 state decisions

180194119501960197019801990decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on West v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. · Wichita Royalty Co v. City Nat Bank of Wichita Falls · Equitable Life Insurance v. Halsey, Stuart & Co. · Equitable Life Ins. Co. of Iowa v. Halsey, Stuart & Co.

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

  1. “[a] statement in a business transaction which, while stating the truth so far as it goes, the maker knows or believes to be materially misleading because of his failure to state qualifying matter is a fraudulent misrepresentation. Such a statement of a half truth is as much a misrepresentation as if the facts stated were untrue.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.