Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 87 Cal. App. 5 - People v. Crossan

87 Cal. App. 5 - People v. Crossan’s Empirical Analysis

1927

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
4
states following
March 1977
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently March 1977 · most notably 62 Cal. 2d 280 - People v. Victor (1965), 104 Cal. App. 2d 642 - People v. Hess (1951)

43 state decisions

130192719301940195019601970decided

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 People v. Fowler · Starr v. Los Angeles Railway Corp. · Wallis v. Southern Pacific Co. · People v. Wilson · People v. Raber

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

  1. “‘‘Witnesses were also permitted, over appellant’s objection, to testify as experts that flying with a loose magneto, or with only one gallon of gasoline in the tank, was not safe. There was other evidence tending to prove the existence of both of these conditions on appellant’s aeroplane at the time in question. This testimony invaded the province of the jury and should not have been admitted. No doubt expert witnesses should be allowed to testify as to the probable consequences of flying with a loose magneto or a small supply of gasoline, but testimony that such flying was not safe went beyond the scope of expert testimony and covered the ultimate fact which the jury were required to determine. (10 Cal.Jur. 1013, 1014.)””
    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.