Orr v. Hensy’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently July 1970 · most notably Gabel v. Hanby (1948), Revell v. Bennett (1947)
2 federal appellate · 39 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 Cruse v. Dole · Leinbach v. Pickwick Greyhound Lines · McDonald v. Yoder · Sayeg v. Kansas Gas & Electric Co. · Stuck v. Tice
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is vigorously argued in plaintiff’s behalf that plaintiff had a right to rely on defendant’s duty to obey the rules of the road and yield to plaintiff the right to enter the intersection first. We are at a loss how to apply that to the case at bar. If plaintiff had looked with sufficient care to have observed defendant’s approaching car, he could, of course, measurably depend upon defendant’s obedience of the rules of the road. But he himself did not observe the rules of the road. He did not look with sufficient care to see defendant’s car speeding towards the crossing; and it is impossible to excuse his negligence on the fallacious presumption that the defendant whom he did not see would yield to him the right of precedence to cross the intersection.” (p. 311.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Green v. Higbee““In this case, of course, the two cars did not enter the intersection at exactly the same time. Plaintiff’s car entered the intersection at 20 miles per hour, which would be 29% feet per second. As the two cars collided about 27 feet west of the point where plaintiff’s car entered the intersection, defendant’s car could not have entered it more than one second behind plaintiff’s. It may well be doubted whether the legislature contemplated that the right of precedence at a country crossroads would turn on the matter of a split second between approaching motorists.” (p. 310.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Green v. Higbee““Could not in all respects be held to every detail of duty imposed upon the driver of the automobile to govern its operation in accord with the rules of the road and to operate it with due regard to other traffic which could be seen approaching the crossing from, a different highway.” (p. 311.)”
1 later decision 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.