46 Cal. App. 63 - Ong v. Cole’s Empirical Analysis
1920
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
June 1950
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Bauer v. Garrett · Murphy v. Waterhouse · Dove v. Torr · Green v. Holway · Smith v. Smith
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The testimony of Mr. Adams shows that Mrs. Ong communicated to him no fact for the purpose of getting any legal advice and he gave her none. She stated to him that she had decided to deed the property at that time to the defendant and asked him to prepare the deed. ... As said in Hatton v. Robinson, 14 Pick. (Mass.) 416 [25 Am.Dee. 415] : ‘Here was no legal advice asked, no opinion requested as to the effect and operation of such a conveyance in point of law and none was given. ’ “It does not appear that any statement was made by Mrs. Ong to Mr. Adams for the purpose of getting any legal advice from him, and under the circumstances we hold that his testimony, as it appears in the transcript, does not come within the rule of privilege. It was not a case ‘ (1) Where legal advice of any kind is sought (2) from a professional legal adviser as such. ’ (Wigmore on Evidence, see. 2292), and it was not error to permit him to give the evidence. ’ ’”
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.