Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 139 CALAPP 143 - McElligott v. Freeland

McElligott v. Freeland’s Empirical Analysis

1934

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
3
states following
November 2000
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently November 2000 · most notably 14 Cal. 4th 605 - People v. Gardeley (1996), 57 Cal. 2d 346 - People Ex Rel. Dept. of Public Works v. Donovan (1962)

4 federal appellate · 31 state decisions

14019341940195019601970198019902000decided

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 National Bank of Commerce v. City of New Bedford · French v. Freeman · 104 Cal. App. 235 - Hammond Lumber Co. v. County of Los Angeles · Cal. Farm & Fruit Co. v. Schiappa-Pietra · Kelley v. Owens

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

  1. “. . it is established that a witness who is called to testify regarding the value of property should, so far as is practicable, detail the facts upon which his conclusion or judgment is based even though the facts upon which he relies would be incompetent to affect value in the particular case and even though the facts which form the basis of his conclusion may have been derived from inquiries made of others or from correspondence. (22 C. J., p. 575). This principle is exemplified in cases where an expert is permitted to give an opinion as to value which is based entirely on knowledge gained from inadmissible sources.””
    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.