Finke v. Boyer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

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

1. ““The cornerstone of the doctrine of fraud is that the statement alleged to be a material misrepresentation must be an affirmation of fact. Expressions as to the values sometimes may be opinions and again they may be statements of fact. Stonemets v. Head, 248 Mo. 243 , 154 S.W. 108 , a case arising out of misrepresentations of the value of traded land, makes an enlighted examination of the question of opinions and facts in actions for fraud. Pomeroy (2 Pom.Eq.Juris. (35th Ed.) § 878) is quoted at length. The following paragraph is in point [154 S.W. loc. cit. 114]: ‘There is still another and perhaps more common form of such misrepresentation. Wherever a party states a matter, which might otherwise be only an opinion, and does not state it as the mere expression of his own opinion, but affirms it as an existing fact material to the transaction, so that the other party may reasonably treat it as a fact, and rely and act upon it as such, then the statement clearly becomes an affirmation of fact within the meaning of the general rule, and may be a fraudulent misrepresentation. The statements which most frequently come with this branch of the rule are those concerning value.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Story v. Nelson