Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 43 CAL2D 481 - Gagne v. Bertran

Gagne v. Bertran’s Empirical Analysis

1954

Citation profile

374
cited by 374 later decisions
21
states following
November 2016
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 8 district · 304 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 374 later decisions — most recently November 2016 · most notably Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. (1963), Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court (2011)

18 federal appellate · 8 district · 304 state decisions — followed in 21 states

8401954196019701980199020002010decided

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 Glanzer v. . Shepard · Commercial Molasses Corp. v. New York Tank Barge Corp. · Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co. · 42 Cal. 2d 682 - Burr v. Sherwin Williams Co. · Seeger v. Odell

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

  1. “[t]he assertion, as a fact, of that which is not true, by one who has no reasonable ground for believing it to be true”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““ ‘The services of experts are sought because of their special skill. They have a duty to exercise the ordinary skill and competence of members of their profession, and a failure to discharge that duty will subject them to liability for negligence. Those who hire such persons are not justified in expecting infallibility, but can expect only reasonable care and competence.’ ””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““In reliance on defendant’s information plaintiffs purchased the property. If the property was worth less than they paid for it, defendant is liable for the difference. On the other hand, if the lots were worth what plaintiffs paid for them, plaintiffs were not damaged by their purchase, for even though they would not have bought the lots had they known the truth, they nevertheless received property as valuable as that with which they parted.””
    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.