Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 57 CAL 493 - Robins v. Hope

Robins v. Hope’s Empirical Analysis

1881

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
March 2003
most recently cited

1 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2003 · most notably Seeger v. Odell (1941), In Re Estate of Cover (1922)

1 district · 29 state decisions

801881189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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.

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

  1. ““The phrases ‘confidential relation’ and ‘fiduciary relation’ seem to be used by the courts and law writers as convertible terms. It is a peculiar relation which undoubtedly exists between ‘client and attorney, principal and agent, principal and surety, landlord and tenant, parent and child, guardian and ward, ancestor and heir, husband and wife, trustee and cestui que trust, executors or administrators and creditors, legatees or distributees, appointer and appointee under powers, and partners and part owners. In these and the like cases the law, in order to prevent undue advantage from the unlimited confidence, affection, or sense of duty which the relation naturally creates, requires the utmost degree of good faith (uberrima fides) in all transactions between the parties.’ ””
    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.