Barnard v. Compugraphic Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently February 2016
3 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
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 98 Wash. 2d 434 - Wilson v. Steinbach · 54 Wash. 2d 570 - Thorndike v. Hesperian Orchards, Inc. · Chatlos Systems, Inc. v. National Cash Register Corp. · 46 Ill. App. 3d 350 - Burrus v. Itek Corp. · 65 Wash. 2d 1 - Larsen v. Walton Plywood 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`Evidence of damage is sufficient if it is the best evidence available and affords a reasonable basis for estimating the loss.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“The court included in the value of the goods as warranted the interest paid to the bank on the purchase price. In the absence of special circumstances, interest is not a proper factor to be considered. Interest represents the cost of money borrowed to buy the goods because capital was not available to make a cash purchase. If, however, the buyer is awarded lump sum damages, he would be able to make a replacement purchase without borrowing and incurring interest expenses. To the extent, therefore, that the recovery included interest on the original purchase, it would constitute a windfall. With today’s rapidly changing interest structures, however, it may be that the buyer can demonstrate some actual loss. We have difficulty envisioning such a scenario, but leave the plaintiff free to present the matter to the district court on remand.”
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.