Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 365 Mo. 191 - Watson v. Bugg

Watson v. Bugg’s Empirical Analysis

1955

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
September 2003
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently September 2003

13 state decisions

80195519601970198019902000decided

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 Och v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. · Carroll v. United Railways Co. · J. E. Blank, Inc. v. Lennox Land Co. · Metropolitan Paving Co. v. Brown-Crummer Investment Co. · Althoff v. St. Louis Transit 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““As to the rescission of contracts of settlement or release on the ground of fraud, and the essentiality of a tender — in this State there is a distinction between fraud in the factum or the execution and fraud in the treaty or the inducement as to the requirement of restoration or tender of restoration of the consideration for a release. Fraud in the factum renders the contract void, and no tender is necessary. Fraud in the treaty (as was alleged in the amended petition in this case) renders it merely voidable, and absent some other ground dispensing with the rule, tender is a prerequisite or condition precedent to the avoidance of the release and to the maintenance of an action on the original claim or cause of action. (Citing cases.) The instant action upon an un-liquidated claim for damages was not within an exception to the rule of es-sentiality of a tender.””
    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.