Berniker v. Berniker’s Empirical Analysis
1947
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 349 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 356 later decisions — most recently May 2007 · most notably 53 Cal. 2d 567 - Brewer v. Simpson (1960), 46 Cal. 2d 715 - Desny v. Wilder (1956)
3 federal appellate · 349 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 Estate of Bristol v. Young · Bainbridge v. Stoner · Stromerson v. Averill · Title Ins. and Trust Co. v. Ingersoll · Buckhantz v. R. G. Hamilton & Co.
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 356 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““As has so frequently been said, it is the general rule that on appeal an appellate court (1) will view the evidence in the light most favorable to the respondent; (2) will not weigh the evidence; (3) will indulge all intendments and reasonable inferences which favor sustaining the finding of the trier of fact; and (4) will not disturb the finding of the trier of fact if there is substantial evidence in the record in support thereof. (Citing cases.) It is not the province of the reviewing court to analyze conflicts in the evidence. (Berger v. Steiner, 72 Cal.App.2d 208, 213 [ 164 P.2d 559 ].) Rather, when a finding of fact is attacked as being unsupported, the power of the appellate court begins and ends with a determination as to whether there is any substantial evidence contradicted or uncontradicted, which will uphold the disputed finding. (Estate of Bristol, 23 Cal.2d 221, 223 [ 143 P.2d 689 ].) ””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“is not applied strictly between near relatives.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““A resulting trust is not founded on the simple fact that money or property of one has been used by another to purchase property. It is founded on a relationship between the two, on the fact that as between them, consciously and intentionally, one has advanced the consideration wherewith to make a purchase in the name of the other. The trust arises because it is the natural presumption in such a case that it was their intention that the ostensible purchaser should acquire and hold the property for the one whose means it was acquired.””
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.