Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 159 Fla. 188 - Lynch v. Walker

Lynch v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

1947

Citation profile

88
cited by 88 later decisions
3
states following
May 2013
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 80 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently May 2013 · most notably 81 So. 2d 635 - Palmer v. RS Evans, Jacksonville, Inc. (1955), 572 So. 2d 1363 - Kraemer v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. (1990)

2 federal appellate · 80 state decisions

29019471950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Anderson · Crenshaw Bros. Produce Co., Inc. v. Harper · Anderson v. Southern Cotton Oil Co. · Albritton v. Scott · Warner v. Goding

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

  1. “When an owner authorizes and permits his automobile to be used by another he is liable in damages for injuries to third persons caused by the negligent operation so authorized by the owner.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"The principles of the common law do not permit the owner of an instrumentality that is ... peculiarly dangerous in its operation, to authorize another to use such instrumentality on the public highways without imposing upon such owner liability for negligent use. The liability grows out of the obligation of the owner to have the vehicle ... properly operated when it is by his authority on the public highway."”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"* * * [T]hat one who authorizes and permits an instrumentality that is peculiarly dangerous in its operation to be used by another on the public highway is liable in damages for injuries to third persons caused by the negligent operation of such instrumentality on the highway by one so authorized by the owner."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.