841 F. Supp. 310 - Vackar v. Package MacHinery Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 2019
1 federal appellate · 4 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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Stationers Corp. v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. · 48 Cal. 3d 711 - Brown v. Kelly Broadcasting Co. · 229 Cal. App. 3d 229 - Felton v. Schaeffer
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[i]n a communication, without malice, to a person interested therein, (1) by one who is also interested, or (2) by one who stands in such a relation to the person interested as to afford a reasonable ground for supposing the motive for the communication to be innocent, or (3) who is requested by the person interested to give the information.... ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“California courts have held that plaintiffs may not avoid the strictures of defamation law by artfully pleading their defamation claims to sound in other areas of tort law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. O'Gara v. Binkley
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.