Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 25 CAL2D 913 - Phillips v. Trusheim

Phillips v. Trusheim’s Empirical Analysis

1945

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
1
states following
November 1999
most recently cited

58 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently November 1999 · most notably 63 Cal. 2d 849 - Weitz v. Yankosky (1966), Bowman v. Bowman (1947)

58 state decisions

180194519501960197019801990decided

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 Holtum v. Grief · Lynch v. Bencini · Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. King Land & Improvement Co. · 11 Cal. 2d 259 - Burnett v. Burnett · Egan v. Egan

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

  1. “[J]udicial error which occurs in the rendition of orders or judgments which are the fault of an exercise of judicial discretion may not be corrected except by statutory procedure,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “... that the [trial] court has inherent power either on its own motion, or on ex parte application, or on notice, to set aside an order or judgment taken through its own inadvertence or mistake; that a prematurely entered order is such an inadvertence, and that application pursuant to section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not necessary.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect.”
    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.