Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 110 Ind. App. 609 - Buddenberg v. Morgan

110 Ind. App. 609 - Buddenberg v. Morgan’s Empirical Analysis

1941

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
June 1983
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently June 1983

12 state decisions

7019411950196019701980decided

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 Prest-O-Lite Co. v. Skeel · Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Montgomery · Swanson v. Slagal, Administratrix · Zimmerman v. Gaumer · Chicago Terminal Transfer Railroad v. Vandenberg

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

  1. ““It is a well-established rule of law that it is only where the evidence upon any question is undisputed and only one legitimate inference can be drawn therefrom that the court has a right to direct a verdict. If there is any legal evidence whatever, having legal weight, or any legitimate inferences from such evidence tending to support plaintiff’s right to recover, the question is one for the jury.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““It is a violation of law in this State to operate a motor vehicle upon the public highways of this State while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. Section 47-517, Burns’ 1933. To operate an automobile in violation of a statute is negligence, and such negligence is actionable if it proximately results in injuries to life or property. It is appellant’s contention that intoxication alone does not constitute actionable negligence. With this statement, we are in accord; but when intoxication of the driver coupled with the operation of a motor vehicle is established, wrongful conduct is shown.” (Our emphasis.)”
    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.