148 W. Va. 142 - Evans v. Farmer’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
96 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 100 later decisions — most recently November 2012 · most notably 148 W. Va. 380 - Hatten v. Mason Realty Company (1964), 151 W. Va. 158 - Morgan v. Price (1966)
96 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 138 W. Va. 613 - Wilson v. Edwards · 147 W. Va. 575 - Lester v. Rose · 138 W. Va. 861 - Davis v. Sargent · 143 W. Va. 648 - Lewis v. Mosorjak · Hartley v. Crede
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 100 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he questions of negligence, contributory negligence, proximate cause, intervening cause and concurrent negligence are questions of fact for the jury where the evidence is conflicting or when the facts, though undisputed, are such that reasonable men draw different conclusions from them.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“If the first act of negligence sets off a chain of events or creates a situation ultimately resulting in injury, such negligence may very well constitute the proximate cause or a proximate cause of said injury_ Negligence which has produced a static condition, even though not simultaneous with the negligence of another defendant, may nevertheless be the proximate cause of the injury. Whether the negligent acts occur in point of time is a question for the jury to answer.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It must be kept in mind that the principal concern in this appeal is not the determination of whether the negligence of Farmer was the proximate cause or a proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the plaintiff but, rather, whether under the facts of this case the question of his negligence should have been submitted to the jury for a finding of the proximate cause of said injuries.”
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.