Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 358 Mo. 636 - Weisert v. Bramman

Weisert v. Bramman’s Empirical Analysis

1948

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
3
states following
April 2008
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 4 district · 31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently April 2008 · most notably Paroczay v. Hodges (1961), George J. Gallon v. The Lloyd-Thomas Company, a Corporation (1959)

10 federal appellate · 4 district · 31 state decisions

1201948195019601970198019902000decided

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 Pulitzer v. Chapman · Loehr v. Starke · Coleman v. Crescent Insulated Wire & Cable Co. · Wood v. Kansas City Home Telephone Co. · Bushnell v. Loomis

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

  1. “A party, who is entitled to avoid a contract on the ground of duress should repudiate it promptly after the duress has been removed. Silence and acquiescence for a considerable period thereafter, action in accord with it, and acceptance of benefits under it, amount to a ratification.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The modern rule of duress as established by the above cases is that ‘duress is to be tested, not by the nature of the threats, but rather by the state of mind induced thereby in the victim’; and that ultimate fact in issue is whether the al leged injured party was bereft of the free exercise of his will power; and of which, the means used to produce such state of mind, the age, sex, capacity, situation, and relation of the parties, are all evidentiary. * * * However, it is also the general rule that a claim of duress cannot be sustained where there is full knowledge of the facts of the situation and ample time and opportunity for full and free investigation, deliberation and reflection.””
    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.