Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 975 SW2D 535 - Caldwell v. Barnes

Caldwell v. Barnes’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

106
cited by 106 later decisions
1
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

100 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 106 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably Wembley Investment Co. v. Herrera (1999), Caldwell v. Barnes (2004)

100 state decisions

560199820002010decided

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 Court of Appeals, 13th District)

Relationships

Relies on Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, Inc. · Alexander v. Hagedorn · Rogers v. Ricane Enterprises, Inc. · Baker v. Goldsmith · Levy v. Roper

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

  1. “[the] petitioner must ordinarily plead and prove (1) a meritorious defense to the cause of action alleged to support the judgment, (2) that he was prevented from making by the fraud, accident or wrongful act of his opponent, (3) unmixed with any fault or negligence of his own.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Two essential elements of laches are (1) unreasonable delay by one having legal or equitable rights in asserting them; and (2) a good faith change of position by another to his detriment because of the delay.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(1) there was an unreasonable delay by appellant in asserting his breach of contract claim against the Bank; (2) the Bank made a good faith change in position to its detriment because of the delay; and (3) there is some element of estoppel or such extraordinary circumstances that it would be inequitable to allow appellant to proceed with his breach of contract claim against the Bank after the delay.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.