Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 180 VA 1 - Remine v. Whited

Remine v. Whited’s Empirical Analysis

1942

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
1
states following
February 2010
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently February 2010 · most notably Steele v. Crocker (1951), Alspaugh v. Diggs (1953)

14 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

18019421950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Green v. Ruffin · Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. Vellines · Johnson v. Harrison · Roanoke Railway & Electric Co. v. Carroll · Manor v. Hindman

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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““When two automobiles, approaching each other at right angles on level ground, traveling slowly and under perfect control in daylight with visibility good, in plain sight of each other and with no intervening traffic, collide, we have a typical case of continuing and occurring negligence. “ Tf, without more, two automobiles, traveling upon intersecting highways, were to run into each other at the point of intersection, plainly there would be no recovery by either driver. The rights of each would have been equal and their negligence the same. The chance which each had to avoid the accident was common to both...” [Emphasis supplied]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Incidents in jury trials come hot and hurrying. From unanticipated sources new problems spring and must be solved without delay. Judges cannot take time off to ponder. These primary purposes are ever before them: All litigants are entitled to one fair trial and to no more; justice must be done and settled rules of law and procedure must be obeyed. If errors beyond those warranted new trials litigation would be unending, for, as we have more than once said, there is no such thing as a perfect trial. Cases sometimes won after long delays might as well never have been won at all.”
    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.