Frear v. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 42 state decisions

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

1. ““In Berrendo Irrigated Farms Co. v. Jacobs, 23 N.M. 290, 300 , 168 P. 483, 486 , we approved and here reaffirm as the correct rule on the quantum of proof required to establish fraud the following from Smith on Fraud, par. 264, and Redwood v. Rogers, 105 Va. 155 , 53 S.E. 6 : ‘Where it is sought to recover for fraudulent representations in regard to the sale of land, there should be the clearest proof of the fraudulent representations, and the evidence much show that the contract was founded upon them.’ Smith on Fraud, supra. “The charge of fraud is one easily made, and the burden is upon the party alleging it to establish its existence, not by doubtful and inconclusive evidence, but clearly and conclusively. Fraud cannot be presumed. It must be proved by clear and satisfactory evidence. It is true that fraud need not be proved by positive and direct evidence, but may be established by facts and circumstances sufficient to support the conclusion of fraud. But whether it be shown by direct and positive evidence, or established by circumstances, the proof must be clear and convincing, and such as to satisfy the conscience of the chancellor, who should be cautious not to lend too ready an ear to the charge.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Walter v. Richardson