Page v. Paterson’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 1969
7 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 Stockyards National Bank v. Maples · Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Shieder · Houston & Texas Central Railroad v. Anglin · Heard & Heard, Inc. v. Kuhnert · Horton v. House
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Appellant also argues that the evidence demonstrates that the negligence of White and of Paterson contributed to the injuries sustained by them. In our opinion the evidence does not establish as a matter of law that the negligence of either White or Paterson, or their joint negligence, was the sole proximate cause of their injuries. “Evidence demonstrating that a plaintiff’s negligence or the negligence of some person other than the defendant was the sole proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries rebuts a charge that defendant’s negligence was a proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries, and shows that no cause of action in fact exists. Horton & Horton v. House, Tex.Com.App., 29 S.W.2d 984 , holdings approved by the Supreme Court. It follows that the issue of sole proximate cause may be an element of a venue fact where the existence of a cause of action in fact is made material by the wording of a particular exception of the venue statute. “Where, however, the negligence of the defendant is a proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries and likewise the plaintiff’s negligence Is a proximate cause of said injuries, the contributory negligence of the plaintiff is described as constituting a defense to plaintiff’s cause of action. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Shieder, 88 Tex. 152 , 30 S.W. 902 , 28 L.R.A. 538 ; Houston & Texas Central Railroad Company v. Anglin, 99 Tex. 349 , 89 S.W. 966 , 2 L.R.A.,N.S. 386. Proof of contributory negligence of the plaintiff does not rebut or”
2 later decisions 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.