Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 187 VA 25 - Waller v. Waller

Waller v. Waller’s Empirical Analysis

1948

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
December 1967
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 1967

4 state decisions

20194819501960decided

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 Massie v. Firmstone · Worrell v. Worrell · Smith v. Turner · Collins v. Robinson

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

  1. ““The Court instructs the jury that as the defendant Goodwin operated his vehicle west on U.S. 460 preparatory to making a left turn into Abbitt’s store, it was his duty to exercise ordinary care: (1) to keep his vehicle under proper control; (2) to keep a proper lookout for other vehicles; (3) to drive his vehicle as nearly as practicable entirely within the right lane and not to move from such lane until in the exercise of ordinary care he ascertained that such movement could be made with safety. “The Court further instructs the jury that if you find from a preponderance of the evidence in this case that the defendant Goodwin failed to exercise reasonable care in any one or more of his duties set out above, then such failure on his part was negligence. And if you further believe from a preponderance of the evidence that such negligence, if any, was materially greater than a want of common prudence, and was sufficient to show an utter disregard of prudence amounting to complete neglect of the safety of his passengers [sic], and constituted gross negligence as defined in the other instructions of the Court, and proximately caused or contributed to cause the accident in question, then you should find your verdict in favor of the plaintiff against the defendant Goodwin and assess the plaintiff’s damages in accordance with the other instructions of the Court.””
    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.