Palmquist v. Mercer’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 114 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 131 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably Rowland v. Christian (1968), 14 Cal. 4th 394 - Rosenthal v. Great Western Financial Securities Corp. (1996)
8 federal appellate · 114 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 Estate of Lances · Raber v. Tumin · 24 Cal. 2d 133 - Oettinger v. Stewart · 34 Cal. 2d 226 - Blumberg v. M. & T. Incorporated · Card v. Boms
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 131 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A motion for nonsuit may properly be granted ‘. . . when, and only when, disregarding conflicting evidence, and giving to plaintiff’s evidence all the value to which it is legally entitled, indulging in every legitimate inference which may be drawn from that evidence, the result is a determination that' there is no evidence of sufficient substantiality to support a verdict in favor of the plaintiff.’ [Citations.] ‘Unless it' can be said as a matter of law, that ... no other reasonable conclusion is legally deducible from the evidence, and that any other holding would be so lacking in evidentiary support that a reviewing court would be impelled to reverse it upon appeal, or the trial court to set it aside as a matter of law, the trial court is not justified in taking the case from the jury.’ [Citations.]” (Palmquist v. Mercer, 43 Cal.2d 92, 95 [ 272 P.2d 26 ].)”
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.