Eklund v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis
1941
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 1969
10 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 Co v. Phillips · Sibley v. Nason · State Ex Rel. National Refining Co. v. Seehorn · Cregin v. . Brooklyn Crosstown Railroad Co. · Mateer v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““An action to recover one or more of the elements of damages which are allowable as compensation for personal injuries caused by negligence, whether it be the injuries themselves or the consequential damages such as loss of earning capacity, value of time lost on account of the injuries, or expenses for medical treatment, hospitalization, and nursing, is based on the cause of action for negligence. The fact that the plaintiff seeks only part of the damages recoverable does not change the nature of his cause of action.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Witthuhn v. Durbahn
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.