Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 213 Md. 527 - Johnson v. State

Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1957

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
1
states following
January 2022
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably White v. King (1966), Smith v. Gray Concrete Pipe Co. (1973)

3 federal appellate · 39 state decisions

10019571960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Basoff v. State · Clay v. State · People v. Angelo · Duren v. State · Lilly v. State

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

  1. “'wanton or reckless disregard for human life or for the rights of others,'”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he jury, weighing the speed in the light of the surrounding circumstances, could, again in the words of Duren , have found "such a lack of control, whether by reason of speed or otherwise, in a place and at a time when there [was] constant potentiality of injury as a result ...." In addition to speed and lack of control, the factor of lack of attention was present. In his brief, Kramer concedes that it could be inferred from the evidence that Kramer "failed to keep a proper lookout and thus came upon the Lee vehicle so suddenly that he had to swerve to avoid it." Thus, the evidence was legally sufficient for the jury to find on Kramer's part a wanton and reckless disregard of the rights and lives of others and so a state of mind amounting to criminal indifference to consequences.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he answer to that question depends upon whether or not, in the circumstances existing at the lime and place of the accident, [Johnson] was operating the automobile at such an excessive rate of speed as to constitute gross negligence....”
    2 later decisions 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.