Briggs v. Liddell’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
3 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently December 2019
3 district · 13 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 Urquhart v. Alexander & Alexander, Inc. · Greener v. Greener · Neeley v. Kelsch · Hurst Motor Co. v. National Bond and Inv. Co. · Bown v. Loveland
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[If one party is laboring under a mistake about a contract term and that mistake ... has been induced by the other party [,] ... then the inequitable nature of the other party's conduct will have the same operable effect as a mistake, and reformation is permissible.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“That proof is convincing which carries with it, not only the power to persuade the mind as to the probable truth or correctness of the fact it purports to prove, but has the element of clinching such truth or correctness. Clear and convincing proof clinches what might be otherwise only probable to the mind ... But for a matter to be clear and convincing to a particular mind it must at least have reached the point where there remains no serious or substantial doubt as to the correctness of the conclusion. (Emphasis added).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he party seeking reformation must establish the mistake by clear and convincing proof.”
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.