Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 402 SO2D 1197 - McDonald v. McGowan

McDonald v. McGowan’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably Thor Bear, Inc. v. Crocker Mizner Park (1995), Reams v. Vaughn (1983)

24 state decisions

1801981199020002010decided

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 Green v. State · Sapp v. Warner · 335 So. 2d 641 - Smith v. Ocean State Bank · 68 So. 2d 180 - Old Plantation Corp. v. Maule Industries · Blum v. William Goldman Theatres, Inc.

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

  1. “A person [or business entity] has no right to shut his eyes or ears to information, and then say that he has no notice. The law will not permit him to remain wilfully ignorant of a thing readily ascertainable by whatever party puts him on inquiry, when the means of knowledge is at hand. If he has either actual or constructive information and notice sufficient to put him on inquiry, he is bound, for his own protection, to make that inquiry which such information or notice appears to direct should be made. If he disregards that information or notice which is sufficient to put him on inquiry and fails to inquire and to learn that which he might reasonably be expected to learn upon making such inquiry, then he must suffer the consequence of his neglect.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) The existence of a contract, (2) The defendant's knowledge of the contract, (3) The defendant's intentional procurement of the contract's breach, (4) Absence of any justification or privilege, (5) Damages resulting from the breach.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The law in this jurisdiction is well established that a person purchasing property with notice that the seller had contracted to convey it to another may be compelled to perform the contract in the same manner as the seller would have been required to do, had he not transferred the legal title.”
    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.