Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 150 NEB 41 - Floyd v. Edwards

Floyd v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

1948

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
December 1979
most recently cited

2 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently December 1979

2 district · 14 state decisions

1001948195019601970decided

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 Buresh v. George · Allen v. Clark · Roth v. Blomquist · Johnson v. Anoka-Butte Lumber Co. · Cotten v. Stolley

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

  1. ““The driver testified that after the accident: T noticed a slight alcoholic odor. * * * I didn’t make any examination, only I did just catch an aroma. * * * I caught the odor.’ However, he did not know whether the odor came from the breath or body of the injured man, or where it came from. “A taxicab driver testified that she saw deceased sometime between 10 and 11 P.M. walk out and stand behind a car between Fourth and Fifth Streets. She said he ‘looked like he was just getting ready to cross the street. * * * I said “Hello, Art,” and he said hello.’ She did not stop to talk to him or anything. She was asked: ‘Q. Did he look like he had been drinking? A. I thought he did. * * * Q. All you did is you walked by him, said hello, he walked out, stood there on the paving, yet you want to tell the jury he was drunk? A. No, I thought he had been drinking.’ She didn’t ‘smell anything,’ ‘didn’t see him drink anything,’ or ‘wobble or anything,’ and she could not ‘tell anything from his talk.’ “Concededly, when the body got to the undertaking parlors, his clothes were removed and a flat, broken, pint-size ordinary-type whisky bottle was found therein, and there was the odor of liquor from saturation of his clothes. Whether or not the bottle was still sealed or had been previously opened, and whether or not deceased ever consumed anything from the bottle or drank any liquor prior to the accident, was not shown. The undertaker and the county attorney both testified that there was no odor”
    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.