Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 655 P2D 757 - Bevins v. Ballard

Bevins v. Ballard’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
10
states following
December 2015
most recently cited

2 district · 25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably Gross v. Sussex Inc. (1993), 190 W. Va. 711 - Teter v. Old Colony Co. (1994)

2 district · 25 state decisions — followed in 10 states

1301982199020002010decided

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 71 Ill. App. 3d 257 - Lyons v. Christ Episcopal Church · 25 Ariz. App. 477 - Barnes v. Lopez · Clary Insurance Agency v. Doyle · Berryman v. Riegert · Cousineau v. Walker

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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[bjrokers . . . can protect themselves from liability by investigating the owner's statements, or by disclaiming knowledge, by requiring the seller to sign at the time of listing a statement setting forth representations which will be made, certifying that they are true and providing for indemnification if they are not.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) whether the defendant had knowledge, or its equivalent, that the information was desired for a serious purpose and that the plaintiff intended to rely upon it; (b) the foreseeability of harm; (c) the degree of certainty that plaintiff would suffer harm; (d) the directness of causation; and (e) the policy of preventing future harm.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “for the purpose of inducing the other to act or refrain from acting in reliance upon it.”
    2 later decisions 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.