Scott v. Simms’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably General Electric Company, and Third-Party v. Kelly C. Moretz, and Mason & Dixon Lines, Inc., Third-Party (1959), Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. Savoy Construction Co. (1982)
9 federal appellate · 50 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 Milwaukee and Saint Paul Railway Company v. Kellogg · Milbury v. Turner Centre System · Jefferson Hospital, Inc. v. Van Lear · Wyatt v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. · Morrison v. Medaglia
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“each case the problem is to be solved upon mixed considerations of logic, common sense, justice, policy and precedent.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“was too remote from the collision in time, place and circumstances. " (Emphasis supplied.) 26 It is clear under our common law, in applying the standard of ordinary care, that particular conduct, depending upon circumstances, can raise an issue for the jury to decide in terms of negligence and proximate cause, and in accordance with the rule previously discussed, we presume that such is the law in Virginia. 27 IV 28 This court has said "The law holds responsible in damages one whose negligent act is the proximate cause of injury to another. `The proximate cause of an injury is that cause which, in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which the result would not have occurred.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“But it is generally held that, in order to warrant a finding that negligence, or an act not amounting to a wanton wrong, is the proximate cause of an injury, it must appear that the injury was a natural and probable consequence of the negligence or wrongful act, and that it ought to have been foreseen in the light of the attending circumstances.”
3 later decisions 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.