Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 196 W. Va. 683 - Yourtee v. Hubbard

196 W. Va. 683 - Yourtee v. Hubbard’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
March 2017
most recently cited

29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently March 2017 · most notably 206 W. Va. 333 - Shaffer v. Acme Limestone Co., Inc. (1999), 224 W. Va. 372 - Noland v. Virginia Insurance Reciprocal (2009)

29 state decisions

130199620002010decided

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 2 Ill. 2d 74 - Ney v. Yellow Cab Co. · 43 Cal. 2d 60 - Richards v. Stanley · Hartford Insurance v. Manor Inn of Bethesda, Inc. · 193 W. Va. 475 - Barefoot v. Sundale Nursing Home · 149 W. Va. 246 - Barnett v. Wolfolk

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

  1. “The following is the appropriate test to determine when a State statute gives rise by implication to a private cause of action: (1) the plaintiff must be a member of the class for whose benefit the statute was enacted; (2) consideration must be given to legislative intent, express or implied, to determine whether a private cause of action was intended; (3) an analysis must be made of whether a private cause of action is consistent with the underlying purposes of the legislative scheme; and (4) such private cause of action must not intrude into an area delegated exclusively to the federal government.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Any person injured by the violation of any statute may recover from the offender such damages as he may sustain by reason of the violation, although a penalty or forfeiture for such violation be thereby imposed, unless the same be expressly mentioned to be in lieu of such damages.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[a] tortfeasor whose negligence is a substantial factor in bringing about injuries is not relieved from liability by the intervening acts of third persons if those acts were reasonably foreseeable by the original tortfeasor at the time of his negligent conduct.”
    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.