Seib v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 state decisions

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

1. ““In a case closely parallel to the instant one on its facts, the court in Seib v. Mitchell, 10 Cal.App.2d 91 [ 52 P.2d 281 ], at p. 94, stated: ‘An express contract need not necessarily be proved but “it is sufficient if from the facts and circumstances it reasonably can be inferred that compensation was in the view and contemplation of the parties.” (Mayborne v. Citizens Trust & Sav. Bank [ 46 Cal.App. 178 ] ( 188 P. 1034 ), supra.) “When services are rendered by one person, from which another derives a benefit, although there is no express contract or agreement to pay for the services, there is a ‘presumption of law’ which arises from the proof of services rendered, that the person enjoying the benefit of the same is bound to pay what they are reasonably worth.” (Moulin v. Columbet, 22 Cal. 508, 509 .) ’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 63 Cal. App. 2d 618 - Wescoatt v. Meeker

2. ““An express contract need not necessarily be proved but ‘it is sufficient if from the facts and circumstances it reasonably can be inferred that compensation was in the view and contemplation of the parties.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 63 Cal. App. 2d 618 - Wescoatt v. Meeker