Rice v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis
1934
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently January 2008 · most notably 32 Cal. 2d 584 - King v. Stanley (1948), 206 Cal. App. 2d 96 - Ulwelling v. Crown Coach Corp. (1962)
25 state decisions
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 Bogart v. George K. Porter Co. · Wittenbrock v. Parker · Cady v. Purser · Rauer v. Hertweck · Cooke v. Mesmer
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Admittedly, were the title company a mere searcher of titles, with accompanying duty to report its findings to its employer, the relation of agent and principal would be established; the same would be true were the relation that of attorney and client.”
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.