Thurmond v. Pepper’s Empirical Analysis
1938
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently March 1973
11 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 Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Breadow · Graham v. Hines · Horwitz v. Jefferson County Traction Co. · Stinnett v. Gulf, C. S. F. Ry.
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1. That the deceased was in a position of peril; 2. That the defendant discovered or realized the perilous position of the deceased in time to have averted the injury by the use of the means at his command, commensurate with his own safety ; 3. That the defendant thereafter failed to use such means ; 4. That the defendant had no reason to believe that the deceased could or would extricate himself from the position of peril.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““If Pepper discovered that deceased was in danger of serious injury because of the suddenly discovered threatening collision, he likewise discovered himself in danger of serious injury from the same cause. And self-preservation is the first law of nature. What a man does in good faith effort to defend himself from receiving serious injury he can justify by his good faith.””
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.