4 Cal. 3d 669 - Mooney v. Pickett’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 300 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 313 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably 5 Cal. 3d 730 - County of Alameda v. Carleson (1971), 16 Cal. 3d 392 - Agricultural Labor Relations Board v. Superior Court (1976)
4 federal appellate · 300 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 Goldberg v. Kelly · 67 Cal. 2d 733 - Morris v. Williams · 2 Cal. 3d 765 - Westbrook v. Mihaly · 66 Cal. 2d 841 - County of Sacramento v. Hickman · 3 Cal. 3d 937 - San Francisco Unified School District v. Johnson
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 313 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“must be consistent, not in conflict with the statute, and reasonably necessary to effectuate its purpose.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Every county and every city and county shall relieve and support all incompetent, poor, indigent persons, and those incapacitated by age, disease, or accident, lawfully resident therein, when such persons are not supported and relieved by their relatives or friends, by their own means, or by state hospitals or other state or private institutions.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[leave] such individuals without any source of relief whatsoever a result inconsistent with the language and purpose of section 17000 and other statutes establishing General Assistance relief.”
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.