33 Cal. App. 2d 24 - Meadows v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis
1939
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently December 1984
3 federal appellate · 6 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 Bibb v. Allen · Campbell v. Willis · 60 Cal. App. 452 - Guy v. Brennan · 97 Cal. App. 171 - Liberman v. McDonnell · Wiger v. Carr
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“" The only remaining point raised pertains to the sufficiency of the notice of appeal. Prior to August 15, 1938, an order was made sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend. Subsequently, a judgment in favor of respondent was entered on August 15, 1938. The notice states that the plaintiff ‘desires to and does hereby appeal from “that order” entered on the 15th day of August, 1938.’ The judgment above described was the only order entered on that date. We are of the opinion that the notice of appeal sufficiently describes the judgment from which this appeal has been perfected.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wilbur v. Cull
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.