Essenburg v. Cabane’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently April 2021
4 state decisions
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 Ferdinand v. Agricultural Ins. Co. of Watertown, NY · 96 Cal. App. 2d 171 - Wirz v. Wirz · Ar-Tik System, Inc. v. Dairy Queen, 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It was for the jury, not [the parties' medical experts], to make a final determination as to whether [Appellant's] subjective testimony was sufficient to prove that [Appellant] had sustained any injury at all.”
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.