Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 218 CALAPP4TH 1402 - Rayii v. Gatica CA2/3

Rayii v. Gatica CA2/3’s Empirical Analysis

2013

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

12 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 2 Cal. 3d 557 - Denham v. Superior Court · People v. Hill · 3 Cal. 3d 875 - Foreman & Clark Corp. v. Fallon · People v. Alvarez · Rose v. State of California

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

  1. “A party ordinarily cannot complain on appeal of attorney misconduct at trial unless the party timely objected to the misconduct and requested that the jury be admonished. [Citation.] The purpose of these requirements is to allow the trial court an opportunity to remedy the misconduct and avoid the necessity of a retrial; a timely objection may prevent further misconduct, and an admonition to the jury to disregard the offending matter may eliminate the potential prejudice. [Citations.] The failure to timely object and request an admonition waives a claim of error unless the misconduct was so prejudicial that it could not be cured by an admonition [citations], an objection or request for admonition would have been futile [citation] or the court promptly overruled an objection and the objecting party had no opportunity to request an admonition [citation]. Attorney misconduct is incurable only in extreme cases. [Citations.]”
    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.