Linn v. Nored’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 state decisions

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

1. ““The cases have construed our guest statute with regard to the liability of the host for operating his automobile at high and excessive rates of speed, and have held that the mere fact that an automobile was operated at a high and excessive rate of speed only raised the issue of ordinary negligence. Crosby v. Strain, Tex.Civ.App., 99 S.W.2d 659 . They have also held that thoughtlessness, inadvertence, or error in judgment did not constitute heedless nor reckless disregard of the rights of others within the meaning of the statute; and there must be something of a continued or persistent course of action in order to constitute heedless and reckless disregard of the rights of others or gross negligence. Pfeiffer v. Green, Tex.Civ.App., 102 S.W.2d 1077 ; Aycock v. Green, Tex.Civ.App., 94 S.W.2d 894 ; Glassman v. Feldman, Tex.Civ.App., 106 S.W.2d 721 ; Hamilton v. Perry, Tex.Civ.App., 109 S.W.2d 1142 ; Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St. art. 6701b, and cases there cited.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bowman v. Puckett · Seitt v. Bernal

2. ““We think the fallacy of petitioner’s reasoning is that she contends a conscious failure to stop at the stop sign; i. e., a conscious violation of the law requiring one to stop at the stop sign, ■constitutes gross negligence on the part of the respondent, whereas the law is that there must be a ‘heedlessness and reckless disregard o-f the rights of others’, which a conscious failure to stop, standing alone, does not show. “ * * * In our opinion, the evidence in the case at bar raises no more than a ‘momentary thoughtlessness, inadvertence, or error of judgment’ and does not meet the requirements ■of the law so as to constitute ‘gross negligence’ and a ‘heedlessness or reckless disregard of the rights of others’.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Webb v. Karsten

3. ““Liability for injuries to gratuitous guest in motor vehicle limited; public carrier and motor vehicle demonstrators excepted Section 1. No person transported over the public highways of this State by the owner or operator of a motor vehicle as his guest without payment for such transportation, shall have a cause of action for damages against such owner or operator for injuries, death or loss, in case of accident, unless such accident shall have been intentional on the part of said owner or operator, or caused by his heedlessness or his reckless disregard of the rights of others.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Vlasek v. Sarkissian