23 Cal. 2d 600 - Loper v. Morrison’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 173 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 212 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably Adam G. Nunez v. The Superior Oil Company (1978), 65 Cal. 2d 114 - Taylor v. Centennial Bowl, Inc. (1966)
27 federal appellate · 173 state decisions — followed in 11 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 Palmer v. Hoffman · Westberg v. Willde · 42 Cal. App. 2d 144 - Bauman v. City and County of San Francisco · Clinkscales v. Carver · San Diego Trust & Savings Bank v. County of San Diego
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 212 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A record of an act, condition, or event shall be competent evidence, insofar as relevant, if: '“1. The custodian or other qualified witness testifies to its identity and the mode of its preparation; “2. It was made in the regular course of business, at or near the time . of the act, condition, or event; and “3. The sources of information and the method and time of preparation, in the opinion of the court, were such as to justify its admission.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““In each case involving scope of employment all of the relevant circumstances 'must be considered and weighed in relation to one another. [Cases cited omitted.] Under these authorities the factors to be considered, insofar as pertinent to this case, are the intent of the employee, the nature, time, and place of his conduct, his actual and implied authority, the work he was hired to do, the incidental acts that the employer should reasonably have expected would be done, and the amount of freedom allowed the employee in performing his duties.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““Defendant also contends that the trial court erred in excluding from evidence a portion of a hospital chart called a ‘nurses’ record.’ The chart contained entries by nurses relative to the condition of the plaintiff during the time she spent in the hospital after the accident, and was offered to refute testimony as to the nature and extent of plaintiff’s injuries. Defendant contends that the record should have been admitted under sections 1953e-1953h of the Code of Civil Procedure, known as the ‘Uniform Business Records as Evidence Act.’ Section 1953f provides: ‘A record of an act, condition or event, shall, in so far as relevant, be competent evidence if the custodian or other qualified witness testifies to its identity and the mode of its preparation, and if it was made in the regular course of business, at or near the time of the act, condition or event, and if, in the opinion of the court, the sources of information, method and time of preparation were such as to justify its admission.’ Section 1953e provides: ‘The term “business” as used in this article shall include every kind of business, profession, occupation, calling or operation of institutions, whether carried on for profit or not.’ Section 1953g requires that ‘This article shall be so interpreted and construed as to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law of those States which enact it.’ The purpose of this act is to enlarge the operation of the business records exception to the hearsay evidence r”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.