Edwards v. Conforto’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently October 2022
1 federal appellate · 15 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 Minyard v. Curtis Products, Inc. · State v. Barras · 289 So. 2d 116 - Edmonston v. A-Second Mortgage Co. of Slidell, Inc. · 456 So. 2d 622 - Kirkpatrick v. Young · 480 So. 2d 454 - Thebner v. Xerox Corp.
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) an enrichment of the defendant; (2) an impoverishment of the plaintiff; (3) causation between the enrichment and the impoverishment; (4) an absence of justification or cause for either the enrichment or the impoverishment; and (5) no other remedy available at law.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[O]nly the unjust enrichment for which there is no justification in law or contract allows equity a role in the adjudication.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.