Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 197 CALAPP3D 381 - Freidberg v. Cox

Freidberg v. Cox’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
2
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably 8 Cal. 4th 666 - Crowley v. Katleman (1994), 72 Cal. App. 4th 1135 - Sierra Club Foundation v. Graham (1999)

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 21 state decisions

18019871990200020102020decided

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 31 Cal. 3d 637 - In Re Marriage of Flaherty · 13 Cal. 3d 43 - Bertero v. National General Corp. · 3 Cal. 3d 841 - Babb v. Superior Court · 46 Cal. 2d 375 - Albertson v. Raboff · 18 Cal. 2d 146 - Jaffe v. Stone

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

  1. “To establish a cause of action for the malicious prosecution of a civil proceeding, a plaintiff must plead and prove that the prior action (1) was commenced by or at the direction of the defendant and was pursued to a legal termination in his, plaintiff's, favor [citations]; (2) was brought without probable cause [citations]; and (3) was initiated with malice [citations].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “if Ingraham had sued to recover attorney's fees solely on the theory of, e.g., quantum meruit[,] and the matter had gone to final judgment, a later action to recover attorney's fees based on joint venture or tortious interference with contract would be foreclosed by the doctrine of res judicata.”
    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.