113 Ind. App. 280 - Anti-Mite Engineering Co. v. Peerman’s Empirical Analysis
1943
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 1976
20 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 110 Ind. App. 633 - Tabor v. Continental Baking Company · Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Powers · 93 Ind. App. 160 - Goshen Veneer Co. v. Cozzi · 83 Ind. App. 31 - Wood v. Snyder · 99 Ind. App. 632 - Bennett v. Maumee Colleries 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It has also been held that it is within the prov-. ince of the fact-finding body to look at the succession of the events or facts, and ascertain whether they are naturally and probably connected with each other by a continuous sequence, or are dissevered by new and independent agencies. Tabor v. Continental Baking Company (1942), 110 Ind. App. 633 , 38 N. E. 2d 257 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““(a) The driver of a vehicle shall stop as required by this act [9-4-1-1 — 9-4-1-138] at the entrance to a through highway and shall yield the right of way to other vehicles which have entered the intersection from said through highway or which are approaching so closely on said through highway as to constitute an immediate hazard . .. .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““While it is to be conceded that appellee entered the through highway in criminal violation of a traffic regulation, it does not necessarily follow that appellee’s failure to stop before entering the through highway was the proximate cause of the accident and his resulting injuries.””
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.