Lynn v. Duckel’s Empirical Analysis
1956
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently March 2011 · most notably 53 Cal. 2d 236 - City & County of San Francisco v. Superior Court (1959), 249 Cal. App. 2d 313 - Old Town Dev. Corp. v. Urban Renewal Agency of Monterey (1967)
34 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 Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. · Abelleira v. District Court of Appeal · 30 Cal. 2d 817 - County of San Diego v. California Water & Telephone Co. · Lindell Co. v. Board of Permit Appeals of San Francisco · United States v. Superior Court
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[Wjhenever a party who, as actor, seeks to set judicial machinery in motion and obtain some remedy, has violated conscience, good faith or other equitable principle in his prior conduct, then the doors of the court will be shut against him in limine; the court will refuse to interfere on his behalf to acknowledge his right, or to afford him any remedy.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““In view of the foregoing provisions of the city charter, it is apparent that after plaintiff was denied a permit to build a paved roadway in the alley administrative procedure required that he apply to the city’s board of permit appeals. This he failed to do, and the established rule is here applicable that one is not entitled to judicial relief until the prescribed administrative remedy is not only invoked but exhausted. . . . “Hence, the trial court properly found that since plaintiff did not exhaust his administrative remedies he was not entitled to judicial relief.””
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.