205 Cal. App. 2d 818 - Pluth v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently August 2002 · most notably 186 Cal. App. 3d 959 - Kinoshita v. Horio (1986), 233 Cal. App. 2d 523 - Logoluso v. Logoluso (1965)
24 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 16 Cal. 2d 516 - Bank of California v. Superior Court · Ludwicki v. Guerin · 21 Cal. 2d 224 - Bakewell v. Bakewell · Hochstein v. Berghauser · 99 Cal. App. 2d 603 - Nuland v. Pruyn
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A contract to make a will may be enforced in equity by impressing a trust upon the property which the decedent had promised to leave. The property in question is subject to administration, and prosecution of the action on the contract does not interfere with administration of the estate.” (See also Goldstein v. Hoffman, 213 Cal.App.2d 803, 812, 813 [ 29 Cal.Rptr. 334 ].)”
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.