Steiner v. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently February 2017
1 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 Ceferatti v. Boisvert · Tucker v. Beazley · Fuhrman v. Farkas
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If we assume the truth of Steiner’s testimony that he relied upon the representation as to income, was he not justified in so doing, and hence not required to investigate to determine the true facts? “Certainly, in such circumstances as we find in this case, a defrauded party does not owe to the party who defrauds him an obligation to use diligence to discover the fraud. A failure on the part of Steiner, under the facts herein, to use ordinary care to inquire from the tenants or elsewhere, could not defeat his right to recover. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““The recipient in a business transaction of a fraudulent misrepresentation is not justified in relying upon its truth if its falsity is obvious.””
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.