Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 146 SO2D 124 - Brown v. Killinger

Brown v. Killinger’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
June 1970
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Kruy v. Smith · Peery v. Mershon · 98 So. 2d 507 - Sullivan v. Stock · Cutchins v. Seaboard Air Line Railroad Company · 106 So. 2d 204 - Erlacher v. Leonard Bros. Transfer

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

  1. ““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 willful and wanton misconduct of the owner or operator of such motor vehicle, and unless such gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct was the proximate cause of the injury, death or loss for which the action is brought; * * *” 1”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““ ‘So it is the guest statute does not apply when the transportation is solely for the benefit of the owner or operator or mutual benefit of the passenger and the owner or operator of the car; nor can the guest statute be invoked in commercial transactions. However, the benefit sought to be conferred as the inducing cause of the transportation should be sufficiently real and tangible. A remote, vague, or incidental benefit is not sufficient. Nor would the journey or the ride suffice to change the status of an occupant of an automobile from that of a guest passenger where such journey or ride is for purposes of companionship, pleasure, social amenities, hospitality, and the like.’ ””
    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.