J. Edward Day v. William H. Avery’s Empirical Analysis
548 F.2d 1018 · 1977
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 20 district · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2019 · most notably Virginia Bankshares, Inc. v. Sandberg (1991), Naartex Consulting Corp. v. Watt (1983)
24 federal appellate · 20 district · 26 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 Erie Co v. Tompkins · Curtis v. Loether · Meinhard v. Salmon · Scalza v. United States · Magna Oil Corp. v. Bateson
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Nominal damages are not awarded in deceit, and there can be no recovery if the plaintiff is none the worse off for the misrepresentation, however flagrant it may have been, as where for example he receives all the value that he has been promised and has paid for.... [at 731; footnote omitted]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“on facts that are unavailable to the listener either because he does not have access to them or because he is obviously incapable of interpreting them”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[j]udg-ments improperly rendered against an infant who had not been represented by guardian ad litem were not void, as for lack of jurisdiction, but voidable”); Hudnall v. Sellner, 800 F.2d 377, 385 (4th Cir.1986) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mitchell v. Gales
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.