Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 355 Pa. 462 - Hamberg v. Barsky

Hamberg v. Barsky’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
2
states following
September 2015
most recently cited

57 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Buchanan v. Brentwood Federal Savings & Loan Assoc. (1974), Frowen v. Blank (1981)

57 state decisions

22019461950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Leedom v. Palmer · Null's Estate · McCown v. Fraser · Metzger v. Metzger · Drob v. Jaffe

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

  1. “... what constitutes ... a confidential relationship ... [i]s not limited ... to one which arises from circumstances or relations preceding the occurrence which gives rise to the controversy____ It exists between two persons whenever “one has gained the confidence of the other and purports to act or advise with the other’s interest in mind”: Restatement, Restitution § 166; comment d. “Confidential relation is not confined to any specific association of the parties; it is one wherein a party is bound to act for the benefit of another, and can take no advantage to himself. It appears when the circumstances make it certain the parties do not deal on equal terms, but, on the one side there is an overmastering influence, or, on the other, weakness, dependence, or trust, justifiably reposed; in both an unfair advantage is possible. * * No precise language can define the limits of the relation or fetter the power of the court to control these conditions. * * * In some cases the confidential relation is a conclusion of law, in others it is a question of fact to be established by the evidence”: Leedom v. Palmer, 274 Pa. 22, 25 , 117 A. 410, 411, 412 ; Null’s Estate, 302 Pa. 64, 68 , 153 A. 137, 139 ; McCown v. Fraser, 327 Pa. 561, 564, 565 , 192 A. 674, 676 ; Ringer v. Finfrock, 340 Pa. 458, 461, 462 , 17 A.2d 348, 350 . “A confidential relationship is not limited to any particular association of parties but exists wherever one occupies toward another such a position of advisor or cou”
    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.