Maryland v. Coard’s Empirical Analysis
1940
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 3 district · 39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently January 2012 · most notably Frye v. Commonwealth (1986), McMillan v. McMillan (1979)
11 federal appellate · 3 district · 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 Ash v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad · Dronenburg v. Harris · Nelson v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad · Davis v. Ruzicka · Northern Central Railway Co. v. State ex rel. Geis
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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Whenever one sees another in a place of peril from which it appears that he can not extricate himself or where it appears that he is unconscious of his danger, or whenever by the exercise of ordinary care the defendant should have been cognizant of the situation and has a clear chance to avoid an accident with safety to himself, he must take that chance. In short, he is charged with what he saw and with what he should have seen. The antecedent negligence of a plaintiff does not of itself preclude his recovery. Starkly stated, the reason for the rule is this: One can not kill another merely because he is negligent.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the lex loci will govern as to all matters going to the basis of the right of action itself, while the lex fori controls all that is connected merely with the remedy”
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.