Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 SO2D 633 - Adam v. English

Adam v. English’s Empirical Analysis

1945

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
August 1982
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently August 1982 · most notably Southport Transit Co. v. Avondale Marine Ways, Inc. (1956), 352 So. 2d 188 - Alexander v. Qwik Change Car Center, Inc. (1977)

2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

14019451950196019701980decided

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 Loprestie v. Roy Motors, Inc. · Sherwood v. American Ry. Express Co. · Overstreet v. Ober · Adams v. Bell Motors, Inc. · Muhleisen v. Eberhardt

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

  1. ““ * * * The record shows that defendant’s truck ran into the rear of the Dodge automobile, in broad daylight, while-the latter was stopped upon the highway. Under such conditions, the burden of proof was upon defendant to exhibit, by a clear preponderance of evidence, that his employee was free from fault. See Loprestie v. Roy Motors, 191 La. 239 , 185 So. 11 ; Overstreet v. Ober, 14 La.App. 633 , 130 So. 648 , and Muhleisen v. Eberhardt, La.App., 21 So.2d 235 . * * * ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “These explanations of the truck driver furnish no legal excuse for the results of the accident. He was travelling about 200 feet to the rear of the Dodge and, even if it stopped suddenly (which is contrary to the statements of Mrs. Honeycutt and the two other occupants of the Dodge), there is no valid reason why he should not have had his truck under such control so that it could have been brought to an adequate stop short of a collision.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “"One who recovers the full value of a chattel destroyed through the negligence of another cannot recover for the value of the use thereof after the same has been destroyed. The measure of damages in such case is the value of the property destroyed."”
    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.