Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 110 CAL 339 - Buckley v. Gray

Buckley v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis

1895

Citation profile

68
cited by 68 later decisions
11
states following
March 2009
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 64 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently March 2009 · most notably 56 Cal. 2d 583 - Lucas v. Hamm (1961), 49 Cal. 2d 647 - Biakanja v. Irving (1958)

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 64 state decisions — followed in 11 states

130189519001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Savings Bank v. Ward · Roddy v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co. · Kahl v. Love

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

  1. “. . . the rule is universal that for an injury arising from mere negligence, however gross, there must exist between the party inflicting the injury and the one injured some privity by contract or otherwise, by reason of which the former owes some legal duty to the latter.”
    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.