Laney v. Rush’s Empirical Analysis
1941
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently November 1974
5 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 Hill v. Kimball · Stillman v. Hirsch · Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Hayter · Waube v. Warrington · Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Trott
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘We conclude that, where a physical injury results from a fright or other mental shock, caused by the wrongful act or omission of another, the injured party is entitled to recover his damages, provided the act or omission is the proximate cause of the injury, and the injury ought, in the light of all the circumstances, to have been foreseen as a natural and probable/ consequence thereof. In our opinion, as a general rule, these questions should be left to the determination of the jury.’” •”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Miller v. Maples
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.