Turner v. Hearst’s Empirical Analysis
1896
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 district · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently March 2000 · most notably Davis v. Hearst (1911), 1 Cal. 3d 20 - Kapellas v. Kofman (1969)
5 federal appellate · 2 district · 50 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Burt v. Advertiser Newspaper Co. · Sappenfield v. Main Street & Agricultural Park Railroad · Tregambo v. Comanche Mill & Mining Co. · Childers v. San Jose Mercury Printing & Publishing Co. · Taylor v. Hearst
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It was not error for the court to allow proof of the extent of plaintiff’s practice. Plaintiff was a lawyer engaged in the practice of his profession. The words of the publication being admittedly libelous per se, and affecting plaintiff’s standing in his profession, it was proper for the jury, in estimating the general damages to which plaintiff was thus entitled, to know his position and standing in society, and the nature and extent of his professional' practice. ‘General damages,’ in an action where the words are libelous per se, are such as compensate for the natural arid probable consequences of the libel, and certainly a natural and probable consequence of such a charge against a lawyer would be to injure him in his professional standing and practice.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““ Adong time ago, Lotta (meaning Miss Carlotta Crabtree) made serious charges against Turner (this plaintiff meaning), alleging that he swindled her out of money, and she had him (this plaintiff meaning) arrested on a criminal charge. The ease was compromised, together with the settlement of several thousand dollars in notes given by the Plumas County lawyer (this plaintiff meaning) to the actress (the said Carlotta Crab-tree meaning). ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Turner v. Hearst
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.