Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 211 CALAPP2D 548 - Tinney v. Tinney

Tinney v. Tinney’s Empirical Analysis

1963

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
states following
January 2016
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently January 2016 · most notably 232 Cal. App. 2d 56 - Colvig v. RKO General, Inc. (1965), 66 Cal. 2d 738 - Thomson v. Continental Insurance (1967)

28 state decisions

100196319701980199020002010decided

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 52 Cal. 2d 154 - Rodriguez v. Barnett · Taylor v. Taylor · Simmons v. Superior Court · 30 Cal. 2d 605 - Huth v. Katz · 54 Cal. 2d 589 - Butler v. Nepple

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

  1. “Defendant does not in any way suggest how the forgery, even if *Page 834 accomplished by plaintiff, has prejudiced any of her rights. The trial court found that the husband was the sole owner of the subject properties. The wife's asserted interest in the properties could not have been divested by the forgery because she in fact had no interest therein. It is thus apparent that the defense of unclean hands is not here applicable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “It is not every wrongful act, nor even every fraud, which prevents a suitor in equity from obtaining relief. His conduct must be so intimately connected to the injury of another with the matter for which he seeks relief, as to make it inequitable to accord him such relief. It must have been conduct which, if permitted, inequitably affects the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, . . .”
    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.