Bell v. Feibush’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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

1. “any property that has been stolen or that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft or extortion, knowing the property to be so stolen or obtained ....”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. United States v. Flores · 247 Cal. Rptr. 3d 114 - Switzer v. Wood

2. “'was introduced at the request of the California Trucking Association, with the goal of eliminating markets for stolen property, in order to substantially reduce the incentive to hijack cargo from common carriers.' " ( Bell , supra , 212 Cal.App.4th at p. 1047 , 151 Cal.Rptr.3d 546 , quoting Citizens of Humanity, LLC v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 1 , 17-18, 89 Cal.Rptr.3d 455 , disapproved on another ground in Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court (2011) 51 Cal.4th 310 , 337, 120 Cal.Rptr.3d 741 , 246 P.3d 877 .) When introduced, the bill provided for a civil action by any public carrier injured by the knowing purchase, receipt, concealment, or withholding of stolen property, but it was subsequently amended to expand the class of potential plaintiffs to include any person injured by a violation of section 496. ( Bell at p. 1047, 151 Cal.Rptr.3d 546 .) Bell concluded the legislative history showed that "the Legislature believed the deterrent effect of criminal sanctions was not enough to reduce thefts. The means to reduce thefts, the Legislature concluded, was to dry up the market for stolen goods by permitting treble damage recovery by 'any person' injured by the knowing purchase, receipt, concealment, or withholding of property stolen or obtained by theft.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 247 Cal. Rptr. 3d 114 - Switzer v. Wood · 236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 641 - Lacagnina v. Comprehend Sys., Inc.

3. “Every person who shall feloniously steal, take, carry, lead, or drive away the personal property of another, or who shall fraudulently appropriate property which has been entrusted to him or her, or who shall knowingly and designedly, by any false or fraudulent representation or pretense, defraud any other person of money, labor or real or personal property, or who causes or procures others to report falsely of his or her wealth or mercantile character and by thus imposing upon any person, obtains credit and thereby fraudulently gets or obtains possession of money, or property or obtains the labor or service of another, is guilty of theft .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 247 Cal. Rptr. 3d 114 - Switzer v. Wood · 236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 641 - Lacagnina v. Comprehend Sys., Inc.