Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 68 CALAPP3D 799 - Martin v. Cook

Martin v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
2
states following
November 2011
most recently cited

61 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently November 2011 · most notably 33 Cal. 3d 348 - Westside Community for Independent Living, Inc. v. Obledo (1983), 32 Cal. 3d 892 - Carroll v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc. (1982)

61 state decisions

47019771980199020002010decided

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 66 Cal. 2d 468 - Tammen v. County of San Diego · Coyne v. Krempels · 5 Cal. 3d 431 - Tresway Aero, Inc. v. Superior Court · Bailey v. Taaffe · 227 Cal. App. 2d 380 - Daley v. County of Butte

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

  1. “`exercised in conformity with the spirit of the law and in a manner to subserve and not to impede or defeat the ends of substantial justice.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “counsel for plaintiff's explanation of his delay when considered in the light of the record ... demonstrates a lack of activity ... [and] indicates a failure to discharge the duty devolving upon every person who files an action on behalf of his client, to prosecute it with reasonable promptness and diligence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[f]ailure of plaintiff's counsel to carefully read and understand the stipulation prior to executing and filing the same is inexcusable conduct and does not provide the foundation for estoppel to assert the five-year mandatory dismissal statute.”
    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.