Sullivan v. Iantosca’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Protective Life Insurance v. Sullivan (1997), Wiedmann v. Bradford Group, Inc. (2005)
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 32 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 Klein v. Catalano · Friedman v. Jablonski · Castellucci v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. · Goulet v. Whitin MacHine Works, Inc. · Tindol v. Boston Housing Authority
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Actions of tort for damages arising out of any deficiency or neglect in the design, planning, construction or general administration of an improvement to real property ... shall be commenced only within three years next after the cause of action accrues; provided, however, that in no event shall such actions be commenced more than six years after the earlier of the dates of: (1) the opening of the improvement to use; or * (2) substantial completion of the improvement and the taking of possession for occupancy by the owner " (emphasis added).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“'Section 2B [of G. L. c. 260] grants protection to designers, planners, builders, and the like.... It does not do so for people who sell real estate.' ... Thus, while G. L. c. 260, § 2B, bars any claim arising out of what [the defendants] did when they built the house, it does not bar claims under G. L. c. 93A arising out of misrepresentations they made about what they did.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[w]e similarly reject the plaintiff's claim that the fraudulent concealment provisions of G. L. c. 260, § 12... [and any common law estoppel] prevent [the statute of repose in G. L. c. 260, § 2B,] from applying here”
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.