Kline v. Turner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Code of Civil Procedure section 338, subdivision (d), effectively codifies the delayed discovery rule in connection with actions for fraud, providing that a cause of action for fraud is not to be deemed to have accrued until the discovery, by the aggrieved party, of the facts constituting the fraud or mistake. In a case such as this, that date is the date the complaining party learns, or at least is put on notice, that a representation was false.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Platt Electrical Supply, Inc. v. Eoff Electrical, Inc. · Cammarata v. Kelly Capital, LLC

2. “We independently review the parties' papers supporting and opposing the motion, using the same method of analysis as the trial court. Essentially, we assume the role of the trial court and apply the same rules and standards.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Leyva v. Garcia · 236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 128 - Leyva v. Garcia

3. “need not be aware of the specific “facts” necessary to establish the claim; that is a process contemplated by pretrial discovery. Once the plaintiff has a suspicion of wrongdoing, and therefore an incentive to sue, she must decide whether to file suit or sit on her rights. So long as a suspicion exists, it is clear that the plaintiff must go find the facts; she cannot wait for the facts to find her.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 276 F. Supp. 2d 1030 - Garamendi v. SDI Vendome S.A.