Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 4 Cal. App. 556 - Gear v. Ford

4 Cal. App. 556 - Gear v. Ford’s Empirical Analysis

1906

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
5
states following
May 1985
most recently cited

2 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently May 1985

2 district · 9 state decisions

20190619101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Altoona Quicksilver Mining Co. v. Integral Quicksilver Mining Co. · Emerson v. McWhirter · Quigley v. Gillett · Harris v. Kellogg · Taylor v. Middleton

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

  1. ““The cases must be rare-in which it can justly be said . that such money is expended in prospecting or working the mine. There may be cases where work has been temporarily suspended, and there are structures which are likely to be lost if not cared for, and it appears that the structures will be required when work is resumed, and that the parties do intend to resume work in which money expended to preserve the structures will be on the same basis as money expended to create them anew. But this could not go on indefinitely. As' soon as it should appear that this was done merely to comply with the law and to hold the property without any intent to make use of such structures within a reasonable period, such expenditures could not be said to have been made in work upon the mine.””
    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.