Glaspie v. Keator’s Empirical Analysis
56 F. 203 · 1893
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1933
12 federal appellate · 1 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 Bennett v. . Judson · Humphrey v. Merriam · Savage v. Stevens · Barnes v. Union Pac. Ry. Co. · Buford v. Caldwell
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The demurrer seem:-: to have boon based on the ground that the complaint was defective in not showing with sufficient certainty that any damage was sustained in consequence of the alleged deceit. The point is untenable. The complaint averred generally, in the concluding paragraph, that damages had been sustained in a certain sum, which was all that the pleader was required to aver. But even if the complaint had been defective, as sup-l)osed, it was merely a, technical defect, which was waived by pleading to the merits, and was cured by the verdict.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Rush v. Newman““in view of the fact that the jury were further advised that, in order to hold a person liable for fraud in making such a representation, they must be satisfied that be did not actually believe the facts to be as represented, or that he had no reasonable ground for supposing it to bo a representation.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.