Ware v. Paxton’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently July 2014 · most notably Transportation Insurance Co. v. Moriel (1994), Continental Coffee Products Co. v. Cazarez (1997)
2 federal appellate · 47 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 Jones v. Ross · Riley v. Industrial Finance Service Co. · Duty v. General Finance Company · Wright v. E-Z Finance Co. · Ware v. Paxton
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The fact that an act is unlawful is not of itself ground for an award of exemplary or punitive damages. The act complained of not only must be unlawful but also must partake of a wanton and malicious nature, or, as sometimes stated, somewhat of a criminal or wanton nature, and an act will not be deemed malicious, and so warranting punitive damages, merely because it is unlawful or wrongful.””
15 later decisions quote this exact passage““ * * * However, there is no evidence that Ware used abusive or insulting language or anything of that nature in the conversation of December 5, 1950, * * * “ * * * Mrs. Paxton stated that on that occasion Ware asked where her husband was, what he was doing, and how he could reach him, and that the ■ effect of this was to make her ‘real nervous.’ She admitted that Ware did not use abusive, vulgar, or indecent language in any conversation with her, ■ nor did he threaten any violence. * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“ill will or bad or evil motive or such gross indifference of the rights of another as will amount to a willful or wanton act done intentionally and without just cause or excuse”
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.