Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 50 CAL2D 163 - Phillips v. Noble

Phillips v. Noble’s Empirical Analysis

1958

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
2
states following
April 2006
most recently cited

42 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently April 2006 · most notably 161 Cal. App. 2d 762 - Nevarov v. Caldwell (1958), Shaw v. Pacific Greyhound Lines (1958)

42 state decisions

240195819601970198019902000decided

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 49 Cal. 2d 652 - Butigan v. Yellow Cab Co. · Shaw v. Pacific Greyhound Lines · 37 Cal. 2d 116 - Parker v. Womack · 44 Cal. 2d 839 - Lynch v. Birdwell · 23 Cal. 2d 256 - Brown v. George Pepperdine Foundation

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

  1. “eliminating the blank space, and choosing the alternatives which were obviously appropriate. The drawing of the inference afforded by the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was of great importance to plaintiff's case, and, in view of all the circumstances, we cannot say that the trial court abused its broad discretionary powers in granting a new trial. The order is affirmed. Shenk, J., Traynor, J., and Spence, J., concurred. CARTER, J. I concur in the judgment of affirmance. The instruction that”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Shaw v. Pacific Greyhound Lines
  2. “mere fact that an accident happened, considered alone,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Shaw v. Pacific Greyhound Lines
  3. “no purpose except to confuse and mislead the jury”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Getas v. Hook

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.