Bixby v. Hotchkis’s Empirical Analysis
1945
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 1985
8 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 Miller v. Miller · 60 Cal. App. 670 - Flynn v. Fink · Bixby v. Hotchkis · 65 Cal. App. 2d 45 - People v. Maddox · 33 Cal. App. 239 - Southern Pacific Railroad v. Blaisdell
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... that the [trial] court has inherent power either on its own motion, or on ex parte application, or on notice, to set aside an order or judgment taken through its own inadvertence or mistake; that a prematurely entered order is such an inadvertence, and that application pursuant to section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not necessary.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Badella v. Miller
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.