Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 142 Fla. 588 - Winthrop v. Carinhas

Winthrop v. Carinhas’s Empirical Analysis

1940

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
2
states following
November 1996
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently November 1996 · most notably Koger v. Hollahan (1940), Orme v. Burr Burch v. Burr (1946)

4 federal appellate · 37 state decisions

190194019501960197019801990decided

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 Bessie Cannon v. State of Florida · Florida Railway & Navigation Co. v. Webster · O'Reilly v. Sattler

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

  1. ““Section 1 — That no person transported by the owner or operator of a motor vehicle as his guest or passenger, without payment for such transportation, shall ‘have a cause of action for damages against such owner or operator for injury, death or loss, in case of accident, unless such accident shall have been caused by the gross negligence or wilful and wanton misconduct of the owner or operator of such motor vehicle and unless such gross negligence or wilful and wanton misconduct was the proximate cause of the injury, death or loss for which the action is brought, provided that the question of - proximate cause, and the issue or question of assumed risk, shall in all such cases be solely for the jury.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Under the statute the jury by their verdict determined the probative force of the evidence, subject only to permissible judicial review, and it does not clearly appear that the verdict rendered is contrary to law or is against the manifest weight of the evidence, nor does it appear that any applicable rule of law was violated in the proceedings or in the judgment rendered.””
    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.