Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 143 VA 903 - Riggsby v. Tritton

Riggsby v. Tritton’s Empirical Analysis

1925

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
8
states following
June 2011
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently June 2011 · most notably Danville Community Hospital, Inc. v. Thompson (1947), Boggs v. Plybon (1931)

2 federal appellate · 33 state decisions

1401925193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Anne Sweeney v. William G Errving · Price v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co. · Scarborough v. Urgo · Carlton v. Boudar · Peters v. Lynchburg Light & Traction 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Wigmore on Evidence, section 2509, concludes his discussion of this subject with these observations: ‘What the final accepted shape of the rule will be can hardly be predicted. But the following considerations ought to limit it: (1) The apparatus must be such that in the ordinary instance no injurious operation is to be expected unless from a careless construction, inspection, or user; (2) both inspection and user must have been at the time of the injury in the control of the party charged; (3) the injurious occurrence or condition must have happened irrespective of any voluntary action at the time by the party injured. It may be added that the particular force and justice of the presumption, regarded as a rule throwing upon the party charged the duty of producing evidence, consists in the circumstance that the chief evidence of the true cause, whether culpable or innocent, is practically accessible to him, but inaccessible to the injured person.””
    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.