Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 9 Cal. 2d 571 - Packard v. Moore

9 Cal. 2d 571 - Packard v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

1937

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
3
states following
October 1981
most recently cited

34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently October 1981 · most notably 35 Cal. 2d 121 - Werner v. Southern California Associated Newpapers (1950), 20 Cal. 2d 585 - Speck v. Sarver (1942)

34 state decisions

140193719401950196019701980decided

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 O'Meara v. Haiden · 18 Cal. App. 72 - People v. Burke · Citti v. Bava · Olsen v. Standard Oil Co. · Green v. Southern Pacific Co.

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

  1. “While the courts have condemned repeatedly attempts to bring before the jury the fact that insurance exists, their condemnation extends only to cases where there is an 'avowed purpose and successful attempt' to bring the fact before the jury. It does not extend to cases where the information comes in, incidentally, in attempting to prove other facts, or where the record does not show that the particular answer was sought or anticipated.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Appellant’s objection to the introduction of photographs of the plaintiff showing the nature of the injuries upon her face while in the hospital is without merit. The photographs portrayed possibly more strikingly plaintiff’s injuries than oral testimony could have done. This fact did not render them inadmissible. The jury was entitled to know of her true condition and if that fact could be more accurately portrayed by photographs than by the testimony of the doctor, or others, it was the right of the plaintiff to resort to that method of proof. (Citing authorities.) ’ ’”
    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.