Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 43 CAL2D 298 - Oliver v. Campbell

Oliver v. Campbell’s Empirical Analysis

1954

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
4
states following
June 2014
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently June 2014 · most notably 6 Cal. 3d 784 - Fracasse v. Brent (1972), Chodos v. West Publishing Co. (2002)

5 federal appellate · 22 state decisions

801954196019701980199020002010decided

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 95 Cal. App. 2d 82 - Sime v. Malouf · Kirk v. Culley · Gray v. Bekins · 30 Cal. 2d 372 - Alder v. Drudis · Castagnino v. Balletta

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

  1. ““The remedy of restitution in money is not available to one who has fully performed his part of a contract, if the only part of the agreed exchange for such performance that has not been rendered by the defendant is a sum of money constituting a liquidated debt; but full performance does not make restitution unavailable if any part of the consideration due from the defendant in return is something other than a liquidated debt.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “One who has been injured by a breach of contract has an election to pursue any of three remedies. He may treat the contract as rescinded and may recover upon a quantum meruit so far as he has performed; or he may keep the contract alive, for the benefit of both parties, being at all times ready and able to perform; or, third, he may treat the repudiation as putting an end to the contract for all purposes of performance, and sue for the profits he would have realized if he had not been prevented from performing.”
    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.