Petersen v. Lundin’s Empirical Analysis
1926
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently April 1948
17 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 Baker v. Delano · Patterson v. Wagner · McMahon v. Flynn
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““There is no rule of law requiring a pedestrian to rivet his eyes on an approaching automobile. He should look but if, having looked, it appears safe to cross, he may proceed, and his care is not to be determined solely by the fact he was struck and was not at that second looking at the automobile.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Moore v. Noorthoek““In the absence of testimony showing the actions of Mr. Petersen as he approached the path of the oncoming automobile, the law permitted the presumption of due care on his part to carry the issue to the'jury.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Arndt v. Grayewski“What was said by Mr. Justice STEERE, writing for the court in Patterson v. Wagner , 204 Mich. 593 , is apropos here:”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.