Schaff v. Daugherty’s Empirical Analysis
1925
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently June 1986
13 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 Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Earnest · Clinton v. Englebrecht · Illinois Central Railroad v. Skaggs · Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Wright · Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Duran
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Yon are instructed in this case that before you can find for the plaintiff it is necessary that you find: First, that there existed a duty on the part of the defendant to protect the decedent from injury; second, that the defendant failed to perform that duty; third, that the death of the decedent was the proximate result of the failure to perform said duty. When these elements are all brought together they undoubtedly constitute actionable negligence, but the absence of any one of these elements renders the evidence insufficient.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Schaff v. Richardson
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.