Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 326 S.C. 409 - Brown v. Pearson

Brown v. Pearson’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
4
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

4 district · 52 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Regions Bank v. Schmauch (2003), Moriarty v. Garden Sanctuary Church of God (2000)

4 district · 52 state decisions

460199720002010decided

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 Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Newman Oil Co. · Moses v. Diocese of Colorado · Destefano v. Grabrian · Lindsey v. Dayton-Hudson Corp. · Capital Area Right to Life, Inc. v. Downtown Frankfort, Inc.

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

  1. “[a]n error not shown to be prejudicial does not constitute grounds for reversal.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Courts of equity have carefully refrained from defining the particular instances of fiduciary relationship in such a manner that other and perhaps new cases might be excluded and have refused to set any bounds to the circumstances out of which a fiduciary relationship may spring.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the mere expectation on the part of the Appellants that Reverend Pearson and the Conference would take action on their complaints [did not] create any such relationship. The steps taken unilaterally by the [parishioner] Appellants do not constitute an attempt on their part to establish the relationship alleged, and there is no evidence that Respondents accepted or induced any special, fiduciary bond with any of the Appellants under these facts in any event.”
    1 later decision 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.