Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 15 CAL 271 - Weaver v. Eureka Lake Co.

Weaver v. Eureka Lake Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1860

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
5
states following
January 1955
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently January 1955

2 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

301860187018801890190019101920193019401950decided

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.

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

  1. ““It is contended that, under the circumstances, the erection of the dam was justifiable and proper, and that the great value of the lakes as reservoirs is a sufficient justification for the injuries resulting to plaintiff. Wo are aware of no principle of lav/ upon which such a position can be maintained. * * * A comparison of the value of conflicting rights would be a novel mode of determining their legal superiority.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.