Baker v. Bennett’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably Foremost Ins. Co. v. Parham (1997), State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Owen (1999)
1 federal appellate · 36 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 Duke v. Young · Dominick v. Dixie National Life Insurance · Coleman v. Commissioner · 431 So. 2d 141 - Alabama Waterproofing Co., Inc. v. Hanby · Appeal of Coleman (Ronald, Nancy)
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"To prove suppression of a material fact, a plaintiff must establish (1) that the defendant had a duty to disclose that fact, (2) that the defendant concealed or failed to disclose that fact, (3) that the concealment or failure to disclose induced the plaintiff to act, and (4) that the action caused injury to the plaintiff. Ala. Code 1975, § 6-5-102 . See, also, Gary v. Kirkland , 514 So.2d 970 (Ala. 1987). Section 6-5-102 does not require proof of an intent to deceive; rather, a breach of the defendant's duty to disclose the suppressed facts is sufficient to trigger liability. Burlington Northern R.R. v. Warren , 574 So.2d 758 (Ala. 1990). Under § 6-5-102 , a duty to disclose arises either from a confidential relationship between the parties or from the particular facts and circumstances of the case. The question of the existence of a duty to communicate under § 6-5-102 is for the jury, which should consider the relationship of the parties, *Page 1145 the value of the particular facts suppressed, and the relative knowledge of each party. Lowder Realty, Inc. v. Odom , 495 So.2d 23 (Ala. 1986). Where the defendant had superior knowledge of the suppressed fact and the defrauded party has been induced to take action that otherwise might not have been taken, the obligation to disclose is particularly compelling. Dominick v. Dixie Nat'l Life Ins. Co. , 809 F.2d 1559 (11th Cir. 1987)."”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) a false representation (2) concerning a material existing fact (3) relied upon by the plaintiff (4) who was damaged as a proximate result.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“agents of Liberty National learned that White would stop paying premiums when an agent stopped collecting the premiums from White at her home and that White would purchase a new policy, or new policies, whenever an agent would visit White a few months after a policy had lapsed, the agents exploited this pattern. Consequently, the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to White supports the conclusion that the”
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.