Adams v. Benson’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
14 district · 64 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably Beahm v. Shortall (1977), Wilhelm v. State of Maryland Traffic Safety Commission (1962)
14 district · 64 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 Baltimore Transit Co. v. State Ex Rel. Castranda · Davidson v. . Cornell · McMahon v. Northern Central Railway Co. · Yellow Cab Co. v. Henderson · Mt. Royal Cab Co. v. Dolan
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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The determination of the extent of impairment of earning power as a result of injury, although involving contingencies and matters of opinion, is an ordinary function of the triers of fact. In many cases evidence of salary, wages, or other income derived from personal services, earned by a plaintiff before and after sustaining an injury, is available for the purpose of comparison in proof of diminished earning power; but such a comparison is not essential to proof of diminished earning power, but all relevant facts must be considered(Emphasis supplied.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bender v. Popp · Sugarman v. Liles““We reaffirm the rule stated in Mt. Royal Cab Co. v. Dolan, 166 Md. 581 , 171 A. 854 , that in an action for personal injuries caused by the negligence of the defendant, the plaintiff may recover not only for the consequences which have actually and naturally resulted from the tort, but also for those which may certainly or reasonably and probably result therefrom as proximate consequences, but not for consequences which are speculative or conjectural. [Emphasis supplied.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““On the other hand, some courts have adopted the rule that expert witnesses may testify to the information upon which they have relied in reaching their conclusions, and this practice permits a medical doctor to give a general account not only of the facts observed but also of the history of the case, including the patient’s statements as to injury, past symptoms, and present feelings at the time of the examination. These courts have explained that the patient’s statements, when presented for this purpose, are considered, not as evidence of the matters stated, and hence not hearsay, but merely as the grounds and reasons for the opinion to be given in evidence by the witness.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Beahm v. Shortall
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.