Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 36 CAL2D 654 - Raber v. Tumin

Raber v. Tumin’s Empirical Analysis

1951

Citation profile

187
cited by 187 later decisions
4
states following
May 1993
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 177 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 187 later decisions — most recently May 1993 · most notably 69 Cal. 2d 850 - Connor v. Great Western Savings & Loan Ass'n (1968), 45 Cal. 2d 811 - Seneris v. Haas (1955)

10 federal appellate · 177 state decisions

97019511960197019801990decided

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 25 Cal. 2d 486 - Ybarra v. Spangard · Estate of Lances · 34 Cal. 2d 226 - Blumberg v. M. & T. Incorporated · Dierman v. Providence Hospital · Card v. Boms

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

  1. ““A motion for nonsuit may properly be granted ‘. . . when, and only when, disregarding conflicting evidence, and giving to plaintiff’s evidence all the value to which it is legally entitled, indulging in every legitimate inference which may be drawn from that evidence, the result is a determination that' there is no evidence of sufficient substantiality to support a verdict in favor of the plaintiff.’ [Citations.] ‘Unless it' can be said as a matter of law, that ... no other reasonable conclusion is legally deducible from the evidence, and that any other holding would be so lacking in evidentiary support that a reviewing court would be impelled to reverse it upon appeal, or the trial court to set it aside as a matter of law, the trial court is not justified in taking the case from the jury.’ [Citations.]” (Palmquist v. Mercer, 43 Cal.2d 92, 95 [ 272 P.2d 26 ].)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Plaintiff was a business visitor toward whom Tumin, together with the servant through whom he was acting in altering the premises, ‘was obliged to exercise ordinary care to keep the premises in a reasonably safe condition, or to warn ... of danger. The duty was not limited to conditions actually known ... to be dangerous, but extended also to conditions which might have been found dangerous by the exercise of reasonable care. [Citations.]’ (Blumberg v. M. & T. Incorporated (1949), supra, 34 Cal.2d 226, 229 [ 209 P.2d 1 ].) ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Unless it can be said as a matter of law, that ... no other reasonable conclusion is legally deducible from the evidence, and that any other holding would be so lacking in evidentiary support that a reviewing court would be impelled to reverse it upon appeal, or the trial court to set it aside as a matter of law, the trial court is not justified in taking the case from the jury.”
    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.