Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 101 CAL 90 - Burbank v. Dennis

Burbank v. Dennis’s Empirical Analysis

1894

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
June 1988
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1988 · most notably Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988), Old Dominion Copper Mining & Smelting Co. v. Bigelow (1909)

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 33 state decisions — followed in 11 states

1401894190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Getty v. . Devlin · People v. Gardner · People v. Lem You · Howell v. Budd · Ex-Mission Land & Water Co. v. Flash

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

  1. ““ ‘There are two principles applicable to all partnerships or associations for a common purpose of trade or business which appear to be well settled on reason and authority. The first is that any man or number of men who are the owners of any kind of property, real or personal, may form a partnership or association with others and sell the property to the association at any price that may be agreed upon between them, no matter what it may have originally cost, provided there is no fraudulent misrepresentation made by the vendors to their associates. They are not bound to disclose the profit which they may realize by the transaction. . . . The second principle is that where persons form such an association, or begin or start the project of one, from that time they do stand in a confidential relation to each other and to all others who may subsequently become members or subscribers, and it is not competent for any of them to purchase property for the purpose of such a company and then sell it at an advance without a full disclosure of the facts.’ ””
    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.