Grier v. Rosenberg’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 district · 62 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently June 2014 · most notably Aravanis v. Eisenberg (1965), Gaither v. Myers (1968)
10 federal appellate · 2 district · 62 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 Inland & Seaboard Coasting Co. v. Tolson · Potts v. Armour & Co. · Brown v. Bendix Radio Division of Bendix Aviation Corp. · West v. Belle Isle Cab Co. · Frenkil v. Johnson
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Ajfter the plaintiff has offered proof of the ownership of the automobile in the defendant, if the defendant does not offer any evidence on the issue of agency, the Court should instruct the jury that if they find as a fact that the defendant owned the car, they must find that he is responsible for the negligence (if any) of the driver. If the defendant does present evidence to show that driver was engaged on busi ness or a purpose of his own, it may be so slight that the Court will rule it insufficient to be considered by the jury in rebuttal of the presumption, in which case the Court should grant the same instruction it would have granted if the defendant had offered no evidence on the issue. The evidence may be so conclusive that it shifts the burden or duty of going forward with the evidence back to the plaintiff, in which event the defendant would be entitled to a directed verdict, if the plaintiff does not produce evidence in reply, unless there is already evidence in the case tending to contradict defendant’s evidence. The evidence, however may fall between the two categories mentioned above, in which event the issue of agency should be submitted to the jury (internal citations omitted).”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]ndeed, if the instruction be not granted, how is the jury to know of the presumption?”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]t is a more natural practice, ... to mention the presumption, so that the jury may appreciate the legal recognition of a slant of policy or probability as the reason for placing on the party this particular burden”. (Italics supplied.)”
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.