Owens v. Haslett’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently July 2005
24 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 Loving & Evans v. Blick · 14 Cal. 2d 102 - McAllister v. Drapeau · 20 Cal. App. 2d 332 - Holm v. Bramwell · Teachout v. Bogy · Haruko Takeuchi v. Schmuck
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where the illegality of a bargain is due to (a) facts of which one party is justifiably ignorant and the other party is not, or (b) statutory or executive regulations of a minor character relating to a particular business which are unknown to one party, who is justified in assuming special knowledge by the other party of the requirements of the law, the illegality does not preclude recovery by the ignorant party of compensation for any performance rendered while he is still justifiably ignorant, or for losses incurred or gains prevented by non-performance of the bargain.” (Best., Contracts, § 599.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dias v. Houston
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.