Johnson v. Snell’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably In Re Landing Associates, Ltd. (1990), Lawyers Title Insurance v. Doubletree Partners, L.P. (2014)
3 federal appellate · 22 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 Langley v. Norris · Bryant v. Clark · Wheeler v. Holloway · Morris v. Millers Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of Texas · Johnson v. Snell
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.
““The contention is further made, and the court of civil appeals so held, that the contract was unenforceable because there was no meeting of the minds of the parties to the contract. Although respondent testified that she understood the contract to mean that she was to receive 6% interest on the balance due of $45,-000.00, there is absolutely no evidence In the present record that the petitioner shared such view. A mistake by only one party to an agreement, not known to or induced by acts of the other party will not constitute grounds for relief. Morris v. Millers Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of Texas, 343 S.W.2d 269 (Tex.Civ.App.1961); Wheeler v. Holloway, 276 S.W. 653 (Tex.Comm’n App.1925). There are no pleadings or evidence of fraud which might vitiate the contract. The respondent’s claim of mutual mistake cannot be sustained. The record does not support respondent’s claim that the contract was the result of mutual mistake.” (Emphasis added)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cooper v. Durham“... failure of the contract to provide the fundamental provisions of a deed of trust does not render the contract to sell property in itself incomplete and unenforceable.”
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.