Richmond v. Frederick’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently June 1979
5 federal appellate · 12 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 20 Cal. 2d 713 - Wennerholm v. Stanford University School of Medicine · 23 Cal. 2d 600 - Loper v. Morrison · Day v. Western Loan & Building Co. · Robinson v. Puls · Lee v. DeForest
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.
““The section grants to the trial court a wide discretion in determining whether the mode of keeping the books justified their admission. [Citations] A holding of the sufficiency of the evidence as to the foundation will not be disturbed if supported by substantial although conflicting evidence or inferences therefrom.” Richmond v. Frederick, 116 Cal.App.2d 541 , 253 P.2d 977, 982-983 (1953).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Curiel v. Mingo
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.