228 Cal. App. 2d 793 - Grinstead v. Krushkhov’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
January 1968
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 41 Cal. 2d 712 - Leo v. Dunham · Staggs v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. · Emery v. Los Angeles Railway Corp. · 148 Cal. App. 2d 176 - Christensen v. Bergmann
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““You are instructed that a person who, without negligence on her part, is suddenly and unexpectedly confronted with peril arising from either the actual presence or the appearance of imminent danger to herself or to others, is not expected nor required to use the same judgment and prudence that is required of her in the exercise of ordinary care in calmer and more deliberate moments. Her duty is to exercise only the care that an ordinarily prudent person would exercise in the same situation. If at the moment she does what appears to her to be the best thing to do, and if her choice and manner of action are the same as might have been followed by an ordinarily prudent person under the same conditions, she does all the law requires of her, although in the light of after-events, it should appear that a different course would have been better and safer.” (Taken from B.A.J.I., No. 137.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Phillips v. Treiman
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.