Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 116 CALAPP 771 - People v. Curtiss

People v. Curtiss’s Empirical Analysis

1931

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
4
states following
January 2014
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 2014

6 state decisions

20193119401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Nash v. United States · Cline v. Frink Dairy Co. · People v. Associated Oil Co. · Buelke v. Levenstadt · Lafargue v. United Railroad of San Francisco

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

  1. ““The standard thus set up is not abstract. It is concrete. The concept by which it shall be determined whether the punishment is or is not unjustifiable is a fluid one — like the concept by which the action of the ‘reasonable man’ serves as a criterion in determining the violations of duty which amount to negligence.””
    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.