33 Cal. 4th 61 - Fletcher v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
3 district · 25 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 63 Cal. 2d 153 - Isrin v. Superior Court · 30 Cal. 3d 528 - Cetenko v. United California Bank · Goodrich v. . McDonald · 1 Cal. 3d 8 - Eschwig v. State Bar · 29 Cal. 4th 142 - Chambers v. Kay
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We therefore conclude that an attorney who secures payment of hourly fees by acquiring a charging lien against a client’s future judgment or recovery has acquired an interest that is adverse to the client, and so must comply with the requirements of rule 3-300. Fletcher failed to comply with the rule. Accordingly, Fletcher’s lien may not be enforced in this proceeding. Were we to hold otherwise, “we would, in effect, be both countenancing and contributing to a violation of a rule we formally approved in order to ‘to protect the public and to promote respect and confidence in the legal profession.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(A) The transaction or acquisition and its terms are fair and reasonable to the client and are fully disclosed and trans mitted in writing to the client in a manner which should reasonably have been understood by the client; and (B) The client is advised in writing that the client may seek the advice of an independent lawyer of the client’s choice and is given a reasonable opportunity to seek that advice; and (C) The client thereafter consents in writing to the terms of the transaction or the terms of the acquisition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(A) The transaction or acquisition and its terms are fair and reasonable to the client and are fully disclosed and transmitted in writing to the client in a manner which should reasonably have been understood by the client; and (B) The client is advised in writing that the client may seek the advice of an independent lawyer of the client’s choice and is given a reasonable opportunity to seek that advice; and (C) The client thereafter consents in writing to the terms of the transaction or the terms of the acquisition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. KAISHA v. Dodson
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.