Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2014 SD 30 - Gabriel v. Bauman

Gabriel v. Bauman’s Empirical Analysis

2014

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Safeco Insurance Co. of America v. Burr · Dubay v. Irish · Elliott v. City of Waterbury · Ross v. Consumers Power Co. · Maragos v. A.S.

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

  1. “[b]ecause willfulness, wantonness, or recklessness 'is almost never admitted, and can be proved only by the conduct and the circumstances , an objective standard must of necessity in practice be applied.' " Gabriel , 2014 S.D. 30 , ¶ 16, 847 N.W.2d at 542-43 (emphasis added) (quoting W. Page Keeton et al., Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts § 34, at 212-14 (5th ed. 1984) ). We must examine the case from the perspective of a reasonable person. Id. ¶ 19, 847 N.W.2d at 543 . [¶ 27.] "Summary judgment is an extreme remedy, [and] is not intended as a substitute for a trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Reasonable persons may understand that they should not exceed the speed limit and that by exceeding the speed limit, they are undertaking a risk of causing an accident. Under our case law, however, reasonable persons under the same or similar circumstances present in this case would not have consciously realized that speeding would-in all probability-result in the accident that occurred.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]his Court warned long ago that if we draw the line of willful, wanton, or reckless conduct too near to that constituting negligent conduct, we risk 'opening a door leading to impossible confusion and eventual disregard of the legislative intent to give relief from liability for negligence.'”
    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.