Dubow v. Dragon’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently March 2015 · most notably Arthur Andersen & Co. v. Perry Equipment Corp. (1997), Amstadt v. United States Brass Corp. (1996)
31 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 192nd Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Gibbs v. General Motors Corporation · Malooly Brothers, Inc. v. Napier · Riojas v. LONE STAR GAS CO., ETC. · Price v. Hurt · Maxwell v. State
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“After careful inspection of the house, and with professional opinions [w]e feel that the house will need extensive on-going maintenance.... We will take the home as is, WITH ALL CONTINGENCIES REMOVED.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“constituted a new and independent basis for the purchase which intervened and superseded the [defendants’] alleged wrongful act ... it is obvious that the [plaintiffs] did not rely on any alleged misrepresentations or failures to disclose since the [plaintiffs] hired experts to inspect the house, and they relied on these experts in negotiating and obtaining a contract modification affording them a reduced purchase price.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“constituted a new and independent basis for the purchase which intervened and superseded the [sellers'] alleged wrongful act.”
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.