Stewart v. Potter’s Empirical Analysis
1940
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 76 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 84 later decisions — most recently December 2010 · most notably Loucks v. Albuquerque National Bank (1966), Bank of New Mexico v. Rice (1967)
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 76 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 Lake Shore Ry Co v. Prentice · Ferguson v. Koch · Colbert v. Journal Publishing Co. · Cleghorn v. . N.Y. Cen. H. River R.R. Co. · Gill v. Selling
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 84 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A principal * * * cannot be held liable for exemplary or punitive damages, merely by reason of wanton, oppressive, or malicious intent on the part of the agent.” [Id. 466, 104 P.2d 736 .]”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he principal, or master, is liable for punitive or exemplary damages only in cases where he has authorized, participated in or ratified the acts of the agent [Emphasis added.] [Id. 466, 104 P.2d 736 .]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Ordinarily punitive damages are not allowed for breach of contract, but there are exceptions to this rule where the breach of contract is accompanied by a fraudulent act. 7 Blashfield Cyc. of Automobile Law, Permanent Edition § 4336, p. 189. Such damages are allowable where the wrongdoing is aggravated, wanton, or maliciously intentional. 24 Am.Jur. 51.” (Emphasis ours.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Whitehead v. Allen
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.