Huttegger v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently April 2013 · most notably Mahler v. Keenan Real Estate, Inc. (1994), Gerhardt v. Harris (1997)
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 23 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 94 Wis. 2d 17 - Ollerman v. O'Rourke Co., Inc. · Bonhiver v. Graff · Rempel v. Nationwide Life Insurance · Ryan v. Kanne · Stotlar v. Hester
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) a false, material representation; (2) the speaker’s knowledge of its falsity or his ignorance of its truth; (3) the speaker’s intent that it should be acted upon by the hearer in the manner contemplated; (4) the hearer’s ignorance of falsity of the statement; (5) the hearer’s reliance on its truth and the right to rely thereon; and (6) proximate injury.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) One who, in the course of his business, profession or employment, or in any other transaction in which he has a pecuniary interest, supplies false information for the guidance of others in their business transactions, is subject to liability for pecuniary loss caused to them by their justifiable reliance upon the information, if he fails to exercise reasonable care or competence in obtaining or communicating the information. (2) Except as stated in Subsection (3), the liability stated in Subsection (1) is limited to loss suffered (a) by the person or one of a limited group of persons for whose benefit and guidance he intends to supply the information or knows that the recipient intends to supply it; and (b) through reliance upon it in a transaction that he intends the information to influence or knows that the recipient so intends or in a substantially similar transaction.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The elements of negligent misrepresentation differ from those of fraudulent misrepresentation in one major respect: while the latter requires proof that the defendant knew the statement was untrue or was reckless as to whether the statement was true or false, the former merely requires proof that the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care or competence to obtain or communicate true information.””
3 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.