Smith v. Turner’s Empirical Analysis
1941
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently December 1968 · most notably Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Harris (1950), Steele v. Crocker (1951)
2 federal appellate · 31 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 W. S. Forbes & Co. v. Southern Cotton Oil Co. · Carroll v. Miller · Collins v. Robinson · Whipple v. Booth · Cawley v. Hanes
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Manifestly these two conflicting stories cannot be reconciled or compromised. Under neither aspect of the case should there have been a verdict which excused both of the defendants. While the jury is the judge of disputed facts, its verdict must be predicated on the evidence adduced before it. “To accept the Turner version of the accident is to acquit the driver of that car of fault and to convict Mrs. Smith of gross negligence, not simple or ordinary negligence. To absolve Mrs. Smith from liability is to say that the accident was due to the negligence of the driver of the Turner car. Plainly we. think under the evidence before us the plaintiff was entitled to recover of one of the defendants, if not of both.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Via v. Badanes““Driving a car on the left side of a highway (except in instances not here material) is in violation of the statute [Michie’s Code of 1936, section 2154 (112)] and constitutes negligence. Whipple v. Booth, 155 Va. 413, 416 , 154 S. E. 545 ; Collins v. Robinson, 160 Va. 520, 523 , 169 S. E. 609 ; Huffman v. Jackson, 175 Va. 564, 568 , 9 S. E. (2d) 295, 297 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Sheckler v. Anderson““ * * * if the violation of the right-hand rule of traffic by Mrs. Smith, under the circumstances of this case, was not gross negligence as a matter of law, it was at least a question for the jury as to whether such violation constituted gross negligence; * * 16 S.E.2d 370, 373 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Petersen v. Parry
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.