Evans v. Eckelman’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
2 district · 66 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently August 2013 · most notably S.V. v. R.V. (1996), Doe v. First United Methodist Church (1994)
2 district · 66 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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 39 Cal. 3d 311 - Blank v. Kirwan · 44 Cal. 3d 1103 - Jolly v. Eli Lilly & Co. · 6 Cal. 3d 176 - Neel v. Magana, Olney, Levy, Cathcart & Gelfand · 27 Cal. 3d 916 - Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · 14 Cal. 3d 502 - Davies v. Krasna
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“` Nothing in this bill is intended to preclude the courts from applying delayed discovery exceptions to the accrual of a cause of action for sexual molestation of a minor. '”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“it will generally be difficult for plaintiffs to immediately detect or comprehend the breach or resulting injuries”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““It has been widely recognized that the shock and confusion engendered by parental molestation, together with the parent’s demands for secrecy, may lead a child to deny or block the traumatic events from conscious memory, or to turn the anger and pain inward so that the child blames himself or herself for the events. [Citations omitted.]. . . . Even where memory of the events themselves is not suppressed, it may be some time before the victim can face the full impact of the acts. [Citations omitted.]. . . . The parent-child relationship is a confidential one [citation omitted], placing special duties on the parent for the protection of the child’s health and well-being, as well as special rights of custody and control. Stepparents, foster parents, and others in positions of parental authority enjoy similar rights over the child. [Citation omitted.] “As a practical matter a young child has little choice but to repose his or her trust with a parent or parental figure. When such a person abuses that trust, he commits two wrongs, the first by sexually abusing the child, the second by using the child’s dependency and innocence to prevent recognition or revelation of the abuse. . . . As in the professional negligence cases, application of the delayed discovery rule would serve to prevent the molester from using the child’s ignorance and trust to conceal the primary tort. [Citation omitted.]” (216 Cal.App.3d at pp. 1615-1616.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Marsha v. v. GARDNER
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.