Timmis v. Bennett’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably 30 Cal. App. 3d 818 - Bradley v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. (1973), Kennedy v. Cannon (1962)
21 federal appellate · 13 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.
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““qualified privilege ... extends to all communications made Bona [sic] fide upon any subject-matter in which the party communicating has an interest, or in reference to which he has a duty, to a person having a corresponding interest or duty. And the privilege embraces cases where the duty is not a legal one, but where it is of a moral or social character of imperfect obligation.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“doctrine of qualified privilege may properly be regarded as including statements made in good faith by a citizen of the community having, or claiming to have, special knowledge or information bearing on such matters of public concern and communicated to others concerned or interested”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The essential elements of a conditionally privileged communication may according ly be enumerated as good faith, an interest to be upheld, a statement limited in its scope to this purpose, a proper occasion, and publication in a proper manner and to proper parties only. The privilege arises from the necessity of full and unrestricted communication concerning a matter in which the parties have an interest or duty, and is not restricted within any narrow limits.”
2 later decisions 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.