Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 123 KAN 702 - Crow v. Colson

Crow v. Colson’s Empirical Analysis

1927

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
4
states following
December 1992
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently December 1992

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 14 state decisions

5019271930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Lake v. Atlantic Works · Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. Deselms · Armstrong v. Montgomery Street Railway Co. · Harrison v. Kansas City Electric Light Co. · Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Rld. v. Stanford

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

  1. ““Where defendant knows or has reasonable means of knowing that consequences not usually resulting from the act are likely to intervene so as to occasion damage, he is liable although it be not an ordinary and natural consequence of the negligence. (Citing cases.) Where an act is negligent it is not necessary to render it the proximate cause that the person committing it could or might have foreseen the particular consequence or precise form of the injury or the particular manner in which it occurred, if by the exercise of reasonable care it might have been foreseen or anticipated that some injury might result.” (p. 704.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Where defendant knows or has reasonable means of knowing that consequences not usually resulting from the act are likely to intervene so as to occasion damage, he is liable although it be not an ordinary and natural consequence of the negligence.” (Citing cases.) (1. c. 704.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.