Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 206 Kan. 760 - State v. Wall

State v. Wall’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
13
states following
August 2015
most recently cited

35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently August 2015 · most notably 77 Ill. 2d 243 - People v. Nunn (1979), State v. Taylor (1973)

35 state decisions — followed in 13 states

10019711980199020002010decided

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 State v. Doyle

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

  1. ““Section 518 specifically relates to section 520, the clear intent of the two being to require such a driver to stop and then furnish specific information and appropriate aid for the benefit of any occupant of the other vehicle who may have been injured in the collision. Section 520 prescribes an affirmative course of action to be taken by the driver. Implicit therein must be the element of recognition or awareness on the part of that driver of the fact of collision. We cannot believe the legislature intended a penalty to be imposed for failing to follow that course of action if a driver was in fact unaware of the occurrence of collision. We do not imply an accused must have positive knowledge of the nature or extent of injury resulting from the collision .... We think it sufficient if the circumstances are such as to induce in a reasonable person a belief that collision has occurred; otherwise a callous person might nullify the humanitarian purpose of the statute by the simple act of immediate flight from an accident scene without ascertaining exactly what had occurred.” 206 Kan. at 764 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Direct evidence of absolute, positive, subjective knowledge may not always be obtainable. We think it sufficient if the circumstances are such as to induce in a reasonable person a belief that collision has occurred; otherwise a callous person might nullify the humanitarian purpose of the statute by the simple act of immediate flight from an accident scene without ascertaining exactly what had occurred.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““An inference of guilt to be drawn from the evidence in a criminal case must be based on something more than mere surmise, conjecture or possibility.” (Syl. f 4.)”
    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.