John Breuner Co. v. Bryant’s Empirical Analysis
1951
Citation profile
42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently October 2012 · most notably 10 Cal. 3d 237 - In Re Buckley (1973), 115 Cal. App. 2d 92 - Smith v. Smith (1952)
42 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 22 Cal. 2d 256 - Phillips v. Superior Court of Kern Cty. · Kreling v. Superior Court · Wilson v. Superior Court · Gale v. Tuolumne County Water Co. · 26 Cal. 2d 144 - Weber v. Superior Court
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is well settled that orders and judgments made in cases of comtempt are not appealable, and this rule has been held applicable both where the trial court imposed punishment for contempt and where the alleged contemner was discharged. [Citations.] An order or judgment in a contempt matter may, however, be reviewed by certiorari [citations], and, where appropriate, by habeas corpus [citations] ." The general rule is stated in 12 Cal.Jur.2d at page 100: “A review in contempt eases can be had only by habeas corpus, certiorari, and in some instances, prohibition—whichever may be appropriate under the circumstances. The scope of the inquiry is limited to jurisdiction. In such proceedings, the reviewing court may examine the acts charged, to determine if they are contemptuous, for the purpose of passing upon the jurisdiction.””
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.