Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 217 CALAPP3D 103 - Taylor-Rush v. Multitech Corp.

Taylor-Rush v. Multitech Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
2
states following
March 2013
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently March 2013 · most notably 29 Cal. 4th 262 - Pavlovich v. Superior Court (2002), 24 Cal. App. 4th 1426 - Dill v. Berquist Construction Co. (1994)

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 36 state decisions

260199020002010decided

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 International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · McGee v. International Life Insurance · Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty. · Calder v. Jones

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

  1. “[t]he notice requirement is not satisfied by actual knowledge of the action without service conforming to the statutory requirements, which are to be strictly construed.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"This doctrine of 'fiduciary shield,’ ... emerged ‘with little notice and with no critical examination' as a novel principle by way of dicta ...(Columbia Briargate Co. v. First Nat. Bank (4th Cir.1983) 713 F.2d 1052, 1055 .) The doctrine arose in a federal diversity case interpreting New York law; however, it was never accepted by, and has been rejected by, New York’s highest court. It has been applied inconsistently in several state and federal courts.”
    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.