Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 39 CAL2D 12 - Pfingsten v. Westenhaver

Pfingsten v. Westenhaver’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

83
cited by 83 later decisions
4
states following
May 2011
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 77 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently May 2011 · most notably 17 Cal. 3d 24 - People v. Kelly (1976), United Air Lines, Inc. v. Wiener (1964)

6 federal appellate · 77 state decisions

2901952196019701980199020002010decided

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 Viner v. Untrecht · Stromerson v. Averill · Darling v. Pacific Electric Railway Co. · Howland v. Oakland Consolidated Street Railway Co. · Valdez v. Percy

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

  1. ““When the plaintiff established by her proofs that the repairs were necessary and the cost thereof reasonable, she completed a prima facie showing of her damages. If the diminution in value of the injured truck was less than the repair bill, the defendant should have shown that fact in reduction of the damages claimed by the plaintiff, for the burden of showing matters in reduction or mitigation of damages rested upon the defendant. The reasonable cost of making necessary repairs in such cases as this has been accepted as a proper element in determining the amount recoverable as damages in many other jurisdictions, as has already been pointed out, and we think it proper to accept it as such in the establishment of a prima facie admeasurement of damages, subject to the right of the adverse party to apply to it the test as to whether or not the diminution in value by reason of the injury was less than the repair bill, and if so, to reduce the damages recoverable to equal the sum representing such difference in value.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The qualification of a witness to testify as an expert is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court, and where there is no showing of a manifest abuse of such discretion the ruling of that court will not be disturbed upon appeal.””
    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.