Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 195 Cal. App. 2d 621 - Kooper v. King

195 Cal. App. 2d 621 - Kooper v. King’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
4
states following
July 2008
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently July 2008 · most notably Vicory v. Walton (1983), 83 Cal. App. 3d 356 - Uva v. Evans (1978)

2 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

12019611970198019902000decided

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 72 Cal. App. 2d 508 - Elms v. Elms · 109 Cal. App. 2d 917 - Baratti v. Baratti · Lynch v. Bencini · Yarbrough v. Yarbrough · 30 Cal. 2d 453 - Freeman v. Churchill

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

  1. “[I]n actions against several defendants jointly, where the defense interposed by the answering defendant is not personal to himself . . . but common to all, as where it goes to the whole right of the plaintiff to recover at all, as distinguished from his right to recover as against any particular defendant, or questions the merits or validity of the plaintiff's entire cause of action in general, or his right to sue, such defense, if successful, inures to the benefit of the defaulting defendants both in actions at law and suits in equity, with the result that final judgment must be entered not merely in favor of the answering defendant, but also in favor of the defaulting defendants.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Where there are two or more defendants and the defenses interposed by an answering defendant go to the whole right of the plaintiff to recover at all, as distinguished from his right to recover as against any particular defendant . . . [And] when such defenses prove successful they enure to the benefit of the defaulting defendant, and final judgment must therefore be entered not only in favor of the answering defendant, but in favor of the defaulting defendant as well.”
    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.