103 Ohio App. 11 - Case v. Carter’s Empirical Analysis
1956
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
March 1976
most recently cited
6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The statute does not require an automobile to stop at an intersection when faced with a yellow light. It puts such motorist upon notice that a red signal will follow immediately which, in itself, would require caution in entering or in moving through the intersection after entering. Inasmuch as it is the implication of the statute that the automobilist moving into the intersection on a yellow light has the right to so enter, it follows that he entered lawfully and had a right to continue through the intersection. This construction is strengthened by the fact that Section 4511.13, Revised Code, before its amendment of September 11, 1951, carried a prohibition against entering the intersection until a green or ‘go’ sign is shown alone. “We are satisfied then, that the court was correct in charging that the defendant was lawfully within the intersection if he entered it while the light was yellow for him.” 103 Ohio App. at 14 , 142 N.E.2d at 673 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Haraszti v. Klarman
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.