McGowan v. King, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
569 F.2d 845 · 1978
Citation profile
52 federal appellate · 3 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 100 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably Barber v. Kimbrell'S, Inc. (1978), Smith v. Transworld Systems, Inc. (1992)
52 federal appellate · 3 district · 13 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 Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · Mourning v. Family Publications Service, Inc. · 329 F. Supp. 270 - Ratner v. Chemical Bank New York Trust Company · Ives v. W. T. Grant Co. · Fannie Thomas, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. Myers-Dickson Furniture Company, Defendant-Appellant-Cross
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 100 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A creditor may not be held liable in any action brought under this section for a violation of this part if the creditor shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he basis of Section 1640(a) liability is the failure to disclose information required to be disclosed; there is no requirement that the plaintiff himself be deceived in order to sue in the public interest.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(f) No provision of this section or § 1611 of this title imposing any liability shall apply to any act done or omitted in good faith in conformity with any rule, regulation, or interpretation thereof by the Board, notwithstanding that after such act or omission has occurred, such rule, regulation, or interpretation is amended, rescinded, or determined by judicial or other authority to be invalid for any reason.”
2 later decisions 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.