Trumbley v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently July 1996 · most notably Jarosh v. Van Meter (1960), Ficke v. Gibson (1950)
4 federal appellate · 32 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 Whitaker v. Keogh · Simcho v. Omaha & Council Bluffs Street Railway Co. · Bergendahl v. Rabeler · Carter v. Zdan · Whitehouse v. Thompson
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is urged, however, that the doctrine of the last clear chance is applicable. We think not. The negligence of the plaintiff was continuous and active to the very time of the accident. The last clear chance doctrine has no application under such circumstances. Whitehouse v. Thompson, 150 Neb. 370 , 34 N. W. 2d 385 ; Carter v. Zdan, ante p. 185, 36 N. W. 2d 781 .” “A person who is himself negligent may not recover under the doctrine of the last clear chance where his negligence is active and continuing to the very time of the accident. Such a situation involves questions of comparative negligence and not those of the last clear chance doctrine.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bush v. James
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.