Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 109 Utah 149 - Van Cleave v. Lynch

Van Cleave v. Lynch’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
8
states following
September 1984
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently September 1984

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 state decisions

5019461950196019701980decided

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 Autio v. Miller · Sweeten v. Pacific Power & Light Co. · Atkeson v. Jackson Estate · Ashland Sanitary Milk Co. v. Messersmith's Administrator · 118 Cal. App. 21 - United States of Mexico v. Rask

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

  1. “The theory that a parent should receive compensation only for actual loss of earnings of a child killed by the negligent acts of another, has not only been obliterated by time and social changes, but by sound reasoning .... While children still frequently contribute to the support of their families, their status in society cannot be measured merely in terms of what they are able to do for the financial aid of their parents. In many cases the cost of rearing children far exceeds all possible earning capacity. Nevertheless, children are sought, not for their financial possibilities, but for love, companionship and happiness which transcend all financial considerations.”
    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.