162 Ga. App. 550 - Adams v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently June 2016
11 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 135 Ga. App. 369 - Gordon v. Gillespie
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Provided, however, if any one or more of those comprising the husband and children, both legitimate and dependent illegitimate, shall desire to bring an action seeking to recover for the tortious homicide of such mother, he or they may file such action and cause a copy thereof to be served personally upon the remaining individuals comprising such husband and children, or if one or more of such persons is a minor, then upon the guardian of such minor and a guardian ad litem appointed as provided by law, or if any one or more of such persons is a non-resident, then in the manner provided by law for service on a non-resident; and any of such persons may intervene in said case as an additional plaintiff at any time before final judgment. After final judgment, any of such persons not a party plaintiff shall have no further right of action against the alleged tortfeasor; but any of such persons not duly served as provided above shall have a right against the parties plaintiff for his or their proportionate part of the recovery in said action.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cole v. Roberts“This legislation evidences a clear intent that less than all of the potential plaintiffs may bring a subsequent action against the successful plaintiffs for a proportionate share of any amount recovered from a tortfeasor. See 8 EGL 166, Death by Wrongful Act, § 33; Eldridge, Wrongful Death Actions 83, § 10-26. The 1960 amendment to this statute did not change any right of the defendant, and he has no standing to object to an action by less than all plaintiff since only one action can be brought against him. Hence, it was not error for the trial court to charge that the minor children were entitled to sue for the full value of the life of the decedent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cole v. Roberts
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.