Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 201 NW2D 399 - Moum v. Maercklein

Moum v. Maercklein’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
May 2015
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently May 2015

8 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 state decisions

8019721980199020002010decided

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 Johnston v. City of East Moline · Mulder v. Tague · Anderson v. Theisen · 206 Cal. App. 2d 96 - Ulwelling v. Crown Coach Corp. · Weck v. Los Angeles County Flood Control District

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

  1. ““To constitute actionable negligence, there must be a causal connection between the negligence and the injury sustained; and for the negligence to be the proximate cause of the injury, ... the injury to the plaintiff must have resulted as a direct consequence of the negligent breach of [the] duty.” [Emphasis added.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Where the negligence complained of only creates a condition which thereafter is acted upon by a subsequent, independent, unforeseeable act, which produces an injury . . . the original negligence is remote and not the proximate cause, even if the injury never would have happened but for the original negligence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Thus a party is not chargeable with all possible consequences of his negligent act, and he is not responsible for a consequence which is possible according to occasional experiences. His is liable only for the consequences which are probable according to the ordinary, usual experiences of mankind.”
    1 later decision 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.