Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 118 CALAPP3D 466 - O'NEIL v. Cunningham

O'NEIL v. Cunningham’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
4
states following
December 2016
most recently cited

37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably 50 Cal. 3d 205 - Silberg v. Anderson (1990), 39 Cal. 4th 299 - Flatley v. Mauro (2006)

37 state decisions

1801981199020002010decided

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 46 Cal. 2d 375 - Albertson v. Raboff · 28 Cal. 3d 739 - People v. Chadd · 22 Cal. App. 3d 626 - Kachig v. Boothe · 30 Cal. App. 3d 818 - Bradley v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. · 60 Cal. App. 3d 573 - Lerette v. Dean Witter Organization, Inc.

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

  1. “[t]he court interpreted existing California precedent and the Restatement categories as sketching the outermost boundaries for application of the privilege ( id., at pp. 824-825), and concluded: `[A]bsolute privilege in judicial proceedings is afforded only if the following conditions have been met: the publication (1) was made in a judicial proceeding; (2) had some connection or logical relation to the action; (3) was made to achieve the objects of the litigation; and (4) involved litigants or other participants authorized by law.' ( Id., at p. 825.) The third condition was further refined by the court, which underlined `the requirement that [the publication] be made in furtherance of the litigation and to promote the interest of justice.' ( Id., at p. 826.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “to achieve the object of the [malpractice] litigation, namely, to settle it.”
    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.