Becker v. Johnston’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
55 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently July 2001 · most notably 6 Cal. 3d 424 - Baldwin v. State of California (1972), 26 Cal. 4th 63 - Cornette v. Department of Transportation (2001)
55 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 Teall v. City of Cudahy · Reuther v. Viall · 67 Cal. 2d 150 - Cabell v. State of California
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ (a) A negligent or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the public entity within the scope of his employment created, the dangerous condition; or “ (b) The public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition under Section 835.2 a sufficient time prior to the injury to have taken measures to protect against the dangerous condition. ’ ’”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Although [plaintiff] argues that the original plans upon which the county relies do not mention lighting or signs warning of the Y intersection, such items, which [plaintiff] now complains should have been provided at some point in time prior to her accident [footnote omitted], admittedly would serve only to lessen the hazard which she contends was created by the manner in which the intersection was designed, and for which section 830.6 extends immunity.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Although Mrs. Johnston argues that the original plans upon which the county relies do not mention lighting or signs warning of the Y intersection, such items, which she now complains should have been provided at some point in time prior to her accident, admittedly would serve only to lessen the hazard which she contends was created by the manner in which the intersection was designed, and for which section 830.6 extends immunity.”
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.