Gastine v. Ewing’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently June 2010 · most notably 54 Cal. 2d 632 - Fifield Manor v. Finston (1960), Florez v. Groom Development Co. (1959)
2 federal appellate · 34 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 Tupman v. Haberkern · 23 Cal. 2d 288 - Crane v. Smith · Ethel D. Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission · Brosnan v. Sweetser · 14 Cal. 2d 87 - DeGraf v. Anglo California National Bank
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The invitation of a proprietor extends not only to all parts of the premises which the patron expressly is invited to use, but also to such parts as he or she is impliedly invited to enter, and the invitation also extends to those portions of the premises where the invitee, under the circumstances and conditions of his invitation, would naturally be likely to go.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“`In a majority of the cases the position is taken that the [gratuitous] services were rendered for the benefit of the injured plaintiff, that the defendant, the wrongdoer, should not be permitted to profit by any gratuity extended to his victim, and that consequently the reasonable value of such services may be recovered.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“... whether the invitation, express or implied, included that part of the premises where the injury occurred is generally not one of law. On the contrary, it is usually a question of fact for the determination of the court or jury.”
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.