Miller v. Gabbert’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 22 state decisions

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

1. ““The simple fact that there was a collision and someone was injured is not of itself sufficient to predicate liability. (Zinn v. Updegraff, 113 Kan. 25, 35 , 213 Pac. 816 ; 9 Blashfield Cyclopedia of Auto Law, 399.) It is familiar law that negligence is never presumed; it must be established by proof. Like any other fact, it may be established by circumstantial evidence. (Mayes v. Kansas City Power and Light Co., 121 Kan. 648 , 249 Pac. 599 .) But the circumstances ‘relied on must be of such a nature and so related one to the other that the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn therefrom is the theory sought to be established.’ (Cornwell v. O’Connor, 134 Kan. 269, 271 , 5 P. 2d 861 .) ‘A fact is not proven by circumstances which are merely consistent with its existence.’ (Canestro v. Joplin-Pittsburg Rld. Co., 135 Kan. 337, 341 , 10 P. 2d 902 .) “In Whiteker v. Wichita Rld. & Light Co., 125 Kan. 683 , 265 Pac. 1103 , it was held: “ ‘A finding of negligence cannot rest on mere conjecture, but must be established by competent proof.’ (Syl. ¶ 1.) “See, also, Beeler v. Railway Co., 107 Kan. 522 , 192 Pac. 741 ; Norman v. Railway Co., 101 Kan. 678 , 168 Pac. 830 , and A. T. & S. F. Rly. Co. v. Toops, 281 U. S. 351 , reversing Toops v. Atchison L. & S. F. Rly. Co., 128 Kan. 189 , 277 Pac. 57 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Goodloe v. Jo-Mar Dairies Co.

2. ““Where it is attempted to establish negligence by circumstantial evidence, the circumstances proved must point directly to the negligence of the defendant and must go further than to be merely consistent with negligence.” (Syl. ¶ 3.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Branstetter v. Robbins