Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 37 IND 1 - Frenzel v. Miller

Frenzel v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

1871

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
September 2016
most recently cited

49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2016 · most notably Cooper v. Schlesinger (1884), City of Teree Haute v. Hudnut (1887)

49 state decisions

150187118801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Griffin v. . Colver · Munroe v. Pritchett · Juzan v. Toulmin · Potter v. Smith · Gatling v. Newell

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.

  1. ““To constitute a misrepresentation a ground of fraud [sic] for avoiding the contract, or to entitle the injured party to his action, it must be in regard to a material fact, operating as an inducement to the purchase or the making of the contract, and upon which the purchaser or person making the contract had a clear right to rely; and the party complaining must have been actually deceived thereby, and generally, such representation must not be mere matter of opinion, or in respect of facts equally open to the observation of both parties, and concerning which the party complaining, had he exercised ordinary prudence, could have attained correct knowledge. If a party blindly trusts, where he should not, and closes his eyes, where ordinary diligence requires him to see, he is willingly deceived, and the maxim applies volenti non fit injuria.” (Emphasis added.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.