Klein v. Caswell’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
September 1956
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Cooley v. Miller & Lux · 109 Cal. App. 548 - Richert v. City of San Diego · McArthur v. Goodwin · Lofstad v. Murasky · 33 Cal. App. 2d 145 - Willis v. Holback
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.
““The possession required by the statutes and by the decisions is one that must be so open, notorious and continuous as to give notice to others that it is hostile to the record owner and must be such as to indicate a claim of right, at least to the extent of putting a prudent man upon inquiry. ‘ “It must, in other words, be an open, unequivocal, actual possession—notorious, apparent, uninterrupted, and exclusive— carrying with it marks and evidence of ownership, which apply in ordinary cases to the possession of real property.” ’ (Lofstad v. Murasky, 152 Cal. 64 [ 91 P. 1008 ].)””
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.