49 Cal. 3d 393 - Lentz v. McMahon’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 101 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 113 later decisions — most recently February 2017 · most notably 1 Cal. 4th 976 - Lusardi Construction Co. v. Aubry (1992), Worcester Insurance v. Fells Acres Day School, Inc. (1990)
6 federal appellate · 101 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 602 (§ 402 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Schweiker v. Hansen · 43 Cal. 3d 1379 - Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing Commission · 4 Cal. 3d 130 - Bixby v. Pierno · 11 Cal. 3d 28 - Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn. · 32 Cal. 3d 468 - People v. Sims
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 113 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Generally speaking, four elements must be present ...: (1) the party to be estopped must be apprised of the facts; (2) he must intend that his conduct shall be acted upon, or must so act that the party asserting the estoppel had a right to believe it was so intended; (3) the other party must be ignorant of the true state of facts; and (4) he must rely upon the conduct to his injury.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[i]n Dyna-Med we simply followed the established rule that, in the absence of express legislative authorization for punitive damages, such damages may not be imposed by an administrative agency. [Citations.] We did not there suggest that use of equitable remedies or doctrines were subject to a similar rule; in fact, we suggested otherwise. (See 43 Cal.3d at p. 1387 [distinguishing `back pay' from punitive damages because the former remedy is `exclusively corrective and equitable in kind'].)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Knight v. McMahon“Estoppel against a county's assertion of purely procedural preconditions and limitations on benefits, when the county itself is responsible for the procedural default, will not defeat the underlying statutory policy of safeguarding accurate and orderly administration of the welfare system. The policy considerations may well be different, however, when substantive preconditions of benefits are in issue.”
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.