147 W. Va. 87 - Shaw v. Perfetti’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 22 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. “In all the foregoing definitions of proximate cause, which may be considered as typical, the definition applies to the proximate cause and in none of them is there any suggestion or intimation that the definition deals with or relates to proximate causes. Proximate cause, regardless of how defined, is always spoken of as the proximate cause, not the proximate causes. It necessarily follows that the proximate cause is the sole proximate cause and that contributory negligence contributes to and becomes a part of such proximate cause but is not the proximate cause. If the negligence of the plaintiff is the proximate cause of the injury, instead of a cause proximately contributing to such injury, the plaintiff is not guilty of contributory negligence but instead is guilty of primary negligence, for there can be no contributory negligence of a plaintiff unless the defendant is guilty of negligence which is the proximate cause of the injury.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Yates v. Mancari

2. “such action on the part of the plaintiff amounted to contributory negligence such as will bar the plaintiffs' right of recovery, and their verdict should be for the defendant.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Yates v. Mancari

3. “correctly state the law on contributory negligence of infants.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Yates v. Mancari