50 Cal. App. 3d 904 - Day v. Sharp’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
63 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably People v. Franklin (2016), 6 Cal. App. 4th 1548 - Sosinsky v. Grant (1992)
63 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 58 Cal. 2d 601 - Teitelbaum Furs, Inc. v. Dominion Ins. Co., Ltd. · 1 Cal. 3d 586 - United States Liability Insurance v. Haidinger-Hayes, Inc. · Flores v. Arroyo · Todhunter v. Smith · City of Pasadena v. City of Alhambra
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] trial court may properly take judicial notice of the records of any court of record of any state of the United States. [Citations.] But, as is stated in Jefferson, California Evidence Benchbook (1972) Judicial Notice, section 47.3, at page 840: `Caveat: Limitations on judicial notice of court records. What is meant by taking judicial notice of court records? There exists a mistaken notion that this means taking judicial notice of the existence of facts asserted in every document of a court file, ... a court cannot take judicial notice of hearsay allegations as being true, just because they are part of a court record or file... .'”
3 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.