Alden v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
1891
Citation profile
1 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently February 1980
1 district · 14 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 Taylor v. . Guest · Busterud v. Farrington · Redding v. Godwin · Nye v. Merriam · Potter v. Mellen
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The essential elements which constitute a cause of action for- deceit are well stated in Busterud v. Barrington, 36 Minn. 320 ( 31 N. W. 360 ), and one is that the party induced to act has been damaged. He must have acted on the faith of the false representations to his damage. A party cannot sustain an action of this character where no harm has come to him. Deceit and damage must concur —Doran v. Eaton, 40 Minn. 35 ( 41 N. W. 244 ) — Or, as it has frequently been put by the courts, fraud without damage or damage without fraud will not sustain the action for deceit.””
2 later decisions 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.