Johnson v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 78 state decisions

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

1. ““Plaintiff and defendant are sisters. The relation between sisters is not presumed to be confidential, as is the relation between husband and wife, parent and child, attorney and client, but a confidential relation between sisters may be shown to exist. [Citing cases.] Blood relationship is an important factor in determining whether in fact a confidential relationship existed. [Citing case, supra.] Where it is established as a fact that a confidential relation exists between sisters, the rules governing confidential relations apply, and a presumption of undue influence arises from any transaction by which the person in the superior position gains an advantage over the other. [Citing cases.] Such transactions are constructively fraudulent, and the burden is cast upon the party who has gained the advantage to show fairness and good faith in all respects. [Citing cases.]”. (Emphasis in quoted material.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tidwell v. Richman

2. ““Ordinarily a grantor who has executed a deed absolute or other executed transfer in consideration of promises of the grantee is not entitled to rescind upon failure of consideration arising from the grantee’s failure to fulfill his promises, but is limited to his right of action for damages for breach of contract. (Lawrence v. Gayetty, 78 Cal. 126 [ 20 P. 382 , 12 Am.St.Rep. 29 ]; Williams v. Reich, 123 Cal.App. 128, 131 [ 10 P.2d 1030 ]; 4 Cal. Jur. 785.) However, an exception to this rule is made in many jurisdictions where the consideration for the deed or transfer is the grantee’s promise to support the grantor. (5 Pomeroy’s Equity Jurisprudence 2d.ed.,p.4755, sec. 2108; note 34 A.L.R. 136 ; 25 Cal. Jur. 173; 4 R.C.L. 509; 6 Cal.Law.Rev. 309.) ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Conley v. Sharpe

3. ““Where a transfer has been obtained through fraud, actual or constructive, it will be set aside at the instance of the grantor, and the grantee will be deemed to hold as a constructive trustee for the grantor.” (Johnson v. Clark, 7 Cal.2d 529, 535 [ 61 P.2d 767 ], See, also, 12 Cal.Jur. p. 738, § 21.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Leathers v. Leathers