172 Ind. App. 610 - Smith v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 2010
15 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 Miller v. Griesel · 150 Ind. App. 179 - Mamula v. Ford Motor Company · 129 Ohio St. 512 - Swoboda v. Brown · Davison v. Williams · 150 Ind. App. 395 - Sheridan v. Siuda
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, the court must scrutinize the statute in question and consider “the purpose of the enactment, the persons whom it was intended to protect, and the injuries which it was intended to prevent” to determine if the statute is such that the violation complained of would constitute negligence. Sheridan v. Siuda (1971), 150 Ind.App. 395 at 406 , 276 N.E.2d 883 at 889 . In making this inquiry, the trial court is interpreting the statute to ascertain whether a particular duty (or prohibition) exists.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Reuille v. Bowers“ilt is clear that statutory negligence is not predicated upon any test for ordinary or reasonable care, but rather is founded in the defendant's violation of a specific requirement of law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Erwin v. Roe“[the Manual plainly makes the decision to utilize many such devices [traffic control devices] discretionary. Some examples are the use of a STOP sign or a YIELD sign....”
1 later decision 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.