Field v. GREGORY’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 10 district · 38 state decisions

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

1. “The particular complaint of the appellants is that the Court failed to explain as to what `entering an intersection at approximately the same time' meant. It is well settled that words used in a statute must be given their ordinary and popular signification, unless there is something in the statute requiring a different interpretation. There are no words used in the statute that have any unusual legal meaning. When the Judge charged the jury in the language of the statute, this was sufficient in this particular case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jorgenson v. Dronebarger

2. “"As a general rule where the law governing a case is expressed in a statute, the court in its charge not only may, but should, use the language of the statute, and may, indeed, be guilty of error if it employs language which constitutes a departure in an essential respect from the statute. However, it is not error to qualify the wording of the statute so as to conform it to construction given by the reviewing courts." See annotation 87 A.L.R.2d p. 544.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jorgenson v. Dronebarger

3. ““Causative violation of an applicable statute constitutes actionable negligence and is evidence of recklessness, willfullness and wantonness. Lumpkin v. Mankin, 136 S. C. 506, 134 S. E. 503 ; Ralls v. Saleeby, 178 S. C. 431, 182 S. E. 750 ; Vernon v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 221 S. C. 376, 70 S. E. (2d) 862 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Green v. Sparks