MacKay v. Breeze’s Empirical Analysis
1928
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 1983
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 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 Pixley v. . Clark · 53 Cal. App. 559 - Tormey v. Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District · Howell v. Big Horn Basin Colonization Co. · 59 Cal. App. 555 - Kall v. Carruthers · Reed v. . the State
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * One who constructs a ditch or canal and conveys irrigation water through the same must use ordinary care in the construction, maintenance, and operation of such ditch or canal. The degree of care required to prevent the escape of water is commensurate with the damage or injury that will probably result if the water does escape. Such is the rule of law repeatedly announced in this jurisdiction and generally established in America and England when applied to ditches and canals. * * *””
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.