Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 150 Tex. 273 - Benoit v. Wilson

Benoit v. Wilson’s Empirical Analysis

1951

Citation profile

652
cited by 652 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 644 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 652 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably McGalliard v. Kuhlmann (1986), Santellan v. State (1997)

6 federal appellate · 644 state decisions

26101951196019701980199020002010decided

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 Tennant v. Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Co. · Nardis Sportswear v. Simmons · City of Houston v. Quinones · Lockley v. Page · London Terrace, Inc. v. McAlister

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

  1. “[t]he jury is the exclusive judge of the facts proved, the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Requested Special Issue No. 22. “Do you find from a preponderance of the evidence that any two or more of the acts of omission or commission inquired about in the two or more Special Issues Nos. 15, 18, 22, 25, 28 and 31, so answered by you in the affirmative, if you have so answered, acting together and concurring, were not the sole proximate cause of the collision involved herein? Answer ‘They were not the sole proximate cause,’ or ‘They were the sole proximate cause.’ “We, the jury, answer:-””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Evidence of intoxication is an evidentiary fact to be considered by the jury, or trier of the facts, in determining whether or not a person is guilty of some act of contributory negligence ....”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.