Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 92 WASH 73 - Meyer v. Maxey

Meyer v. Maxey’s Empirical Analysis

1916

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
December 1922
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Stewart v. Larkin · Conta v. Corgiat · Wilson v. Mills · Van Horn v. O'Connor · Shores v. Hutchinson

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.

  1. ““Even assuming that every representation charged by respondents had been made by appellant, it is manifest that the case falls within the rule announced by Pomeroy and reiterated'in many of our decisions to the effect that, where the party charging misrepresentation institutes inquiry for himself, has recourse to the proper means of obtaining information and actually learns the real facts, or could have done so by availing himself of the means of information at hand, he cannot claim that he did not learn the truth and was misled by the representations. . . . While we have gone as far as any court in relieving against inducing fraud and artifice,-we have never gone so far as to relieve a purchaser of all responsibility for a failure to observe facts and conditions as much within his reach as that of the seller, especially where he has professedly undertaken an examination for himself with every opportunity to make it as complete as he pleased.””
    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.