Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 39 CAL 412 - Page v. Fowler

Page v. Fowler’s Empirical Analysis

1870

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
21
states following
April 1952
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 55 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently April 1952 · most notably In re Rose (1889), Meeker v. Gardella (1890)

2 federal appellate · 55 state decisions — followed in 21 states

150187018801890190019101920193019401950decided

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 Halleck v. Mixer · Suydam v. Jenkins, Sheriff · Page v. Fowler · Kimball v. Lohmas · Page v. Fowler

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

  1. ““In other words, the rule deducible from the authorities is that in cases affecting property of a fluctuating value, where exemplary damages are not allowed, the correct measure of damages is the highest market value within a reasonable time after the property was taken, with interest computed from the time such value was estimated. . . . The object of allowing this range at all, ... is because the owner might, and perhaps would, have obtained the price if he had been allowed to retain the property, and the object will control in fixing the limit allowed for estimating the value. ... As to the annual products of the soil, which are raised for annual consumption, they are almost universally disposed of by the producers within a few months after they are harvested, and, I may say, invariably consumed, or otherwise disposed of before the next harvest; and in my judgment a longer period than that ought never to be allowed within which to estimate the damages as to such property, at least without some proof that the property would have been retained.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.