Rogers v. Woods’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““By § 4 of act 223 of the Acts of 1927, subdivision (a), the rule of conduct for persons driving vehicles on the highway is prescribed, i.e., that he ‘shall drive the same (vehicle) at a careful and prudent speed not greater than is reasonable and proper having due regard to the traffic, surface and width of the highway, and of any other conditions then existing, and no person shall drive any vehicle upon a highway at such speed as to endanger the life, limb, or property of any person.’ “By subdivision (b) of the same section it is provided that in all cases where the speed at which a vehicle is driven shall not exceed the speed limits specified in the act, the driver’s conduct shall be prima facie lawful. “By subdivision 8 it is provided that it shall be prima facie unlawful to exceed the speed limits, thirty-five miles per hour being the extreme limit. “Upon the foregoing statute is based the instruction of which complaint was made. As stated by the appellant, it creates no civil liability, but imposes a penalty for its violation. Yet an injured party, in seeking redress by common-law action, may base such action on the evidence found in its violation; and, as such action is based not on the statute but on the evidence found in its violation, a literal adherence to its language is not essential, though perhaps to be desired. “According to the statement made in Huddy’s Enc. on Automobile Law, vol. 3-4, page 61, the great weight of authority is to the effect that a violation ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hammond v. Hamby