Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 129 CALAPP3D 745 - Williams v. Taylor

Williams v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

105
cited by 105 later decisions
5
states following
November 2016
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 2 district · 76 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 105 later decisions — most recently November 2016 · most notably 31 Cal. 4th 709 - Hassan v. Mercy American River Hospital (2003), 32 Cal. 4th 350 - Hagberg v. California Federal Bank FSB (2004)

10 federal appellate · 2 district · 76 state decisions

3401982199020002010decided

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 Stationers Corp. v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. · 70 Cal. App. 3d 48 - Imig v. Ferrar · 40 Cal. App. 3d 841 - Deaile v. General Telephone Co. of California · 28 Cal. App. 3d 27 - King v. Borges · 71 Cal. App. 3d 873 - La Verne Ramsden v. W. Union

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

  1. “communication ... designed to prompt action by [an official] entity, is as much a part of an `official proceeding' as a communication made after an official investigation has commenced.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A privileged publication or broadcast is one made — 3. In a communication, without malice, to a person interested therein, (1) by one who is also interested. . . .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “other official proceeding authorized by law.”
    2 later decisions 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.