574 So. 2d 438 - Cooper v. Crow’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1635 (§ 125 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 41 (§ 1 of the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914)
Relies on 549 So. 2d 840 - Rosell v. Esco · Bibby v. United States · Kelly v. Robinson · American Financial Services Association v. Federal Trade Commission South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs · Dixon v. Northeast Louisiana Power Co-Op., Inc.
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to consummate the transaction which [the buyer] initiated and solicited. [The buyer's] appointment to meet [the vendor] was simply to examine the premises in order to reach a final price for the contract and was not in any way a solicitation. The [buyer]’s invitation to meet with [the vendor] was not made for the purpose of allowing [the vendor] to make a "sales pitch,” but rather for [the parties] to discuss specific terms and prices after the decision to purchase had already been made.”
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.