Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 57 CALAPP3D 845 - Kindt v. Kauffman

Kindt v. Kauffman’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
5
states following
March 2006
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently March 2006 · most notably 24 Cal. 3d 890 - Taylor v. Superior Court (1979), 20 Cal. 3d 389 - Ewing v. Cloverleaf Bowl (1978)

27 state decisions

1001976198019902000decided

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 Dillon v. Legg · 13 Cal. 3d 804 - Nga Li v. Yellow Cab Co. · 5 Cal. 3d 153 - Vesely v. Sager · 15 Cal. 3d 40 - Weirum v. RKO General, Inc. · 12 Cal. 3d 382 - Rodriguez v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.

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

  1. “`The inestimable gift of reason and self-control cries out for preservation in every person, and the duty of its preservation devolves upon each member of the public. When the restraint of reason and the ability to care for one's self are perverted by a conscious, self-indulgent act of voluntary intoxication which temporarily casts off those powers, no societal or personal wrong, nor violation of public or social policy is accomplished or violated if the actor is alone held answerable for his injury.... [¶] Governmental paternalism protecting people from their own conscious folly fosters individual irresponsibility and is normally to be discouraged.... To go yet another step and allow monetary recovery to one who knowingly becomes intoxicated and thereby injures himself is in our view morally indefensible.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Everything reasonably conceivable should be done to discourage such activity; conversely, nothing should be done to encourage it, particularly by the judiciary. A rule of liability here could have no other possible effect upon patrons than to encourage them to excessive liquor consumption at taverns. Forthwith upon the announcement of a rule of law which permits a drunken patron to recover damages for his own injuries from the tavern keeper, patrons who have heretofore felt concern for their own safety should they become overly intoxicated, will relax their personal efforts, for three readily apparent reasons: First, because they will assume that the bartenders will exercise greater care in their behalf; second, because they very naturally will feel that if they are hurt they will be compensated for such hurt; and third, because we, the judiciary, will in effect have encouraged their overindulgence, by pampering their delinquency.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the devastating highway carnage resulting from automobile accidents”
    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.