101 Cal. App. 388 - Lambert v. Kamp’s Empirical Analysis
1929
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 1987
21 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.
Relationships
Relies on 38 Cal. App. 8 - Donnatin v. Union Hardware & Metal Co. · Hughes v. De Mund · Benjamin v. Stewart · Wilcox v. Hardisty
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.
““ .... while a new trial may be granted in the case of excessive damages appearing to have been given under the influence of passion or prejudice, there is no justification in law for disturbing a verdict or finding because of passion or prejudice of a jury in giving insufficient or inadequate damages. (8 Cal. Jur. 833; Benjamin v. Stewart, 61 Cal. 605 .) On the other hand,, it is well settled that an inadequate recovery may be set aside and a new trial granted on the ground that the evidence does not justify the verdict. (See '8 Cal. Jur. 833, and supporting authorities.) ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Riggs v. Smith
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.