Halbach v. Robinson Bros.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 5 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"(P)laintiff's version, accepted by the jury, was that the truck was not within her limited range of visibility when she started to cross the highway. Being unaware of its approach (by reason of fog), she was not testing an obvious danger by attempting to clear the lane before it reached her. If plaintiff was to cross at all, she had to do so by ascertaining that no approaching traffic was in view before proceeding. The jury found that she complied with this duty. * * * * * * "(S)he had a right within reasonable limits to assume that ordinary care would be used to protect her and her property from injury; she was not required to anticipate and guard against the want of ordinary care on the part of another, or to assume that another would flagrantly violate the statutory speed limit. * * * * * * "We find that the evidence does not so clearly and unmistakably point to contributory negligence on the part of plaintiff that it can be declared as a matter of law. It is only where reasonably minded men could not honestly deduce any other inference that the question of contributory negligence will be taken away from the jury."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 144 So. 2d 341 - Bowen v. Manuel

2. ““In short, a driver who takes his chances on crossing a lane of traffic ahead of visible approaching vehicles lawfully therein, is guilty of contributory negligence if he fails to execute the crossing in safety.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Sweeney v. United States