Shrout v. Rinker’s Empirical Analysis
1938
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently July 1996
12 state decisions
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 Jacobs v. Hobson · Cashin v. State Highway Commission
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. . The reason for the constitutional provision that an act shall not contain more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title, is to prevent two or more unrelated subjects being covered in an act so that members of the legislature would feel that they should vote for a bill which contained a provision to which they were opposed in order to secure the enactment of the bill with some provisions they considered important. . . .” (p 822.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"liability should attach to any person who placed as dangerous an agency as an automobile within the control of a minor who was not more than sixteen years old. The idea of the legislature was to discourage the practice of endangering the safety of the public by permitting people of the classes named to drive a motor car on the streets." Shrout v. Rinker, 148 Kan. 820, 824 , 84 P.2d 974 (1938).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“any person who gives or furnishes a motor vehicle to such minor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Davey v. Hedden
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.