Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 Md. 150 - Grue v. Schmidbauer

Grue v. Schmidbauer’s Empirical Analysis

1964

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
1
states following
September 1995
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 53 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently September 1995 · most notably Yommer v. McKenzie (1969), Creaser v. Owens (1972)

2 federal appellate · 53 state decisions

3401964197019801990decided

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 Greenfeld v. Hook · Sun Cab Company, Inc. v. Cusick · Holler v. Lowery · Brown v. Ellis · Ness v. Males

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

  1. ““However, once the entering car has cleared the intersection and reached a point where it does not interfere with the favored driver’s right of way through the intersection, the boulevard law ceases to be applicable. McCann v. Crum, 231 Md. 65 , 188 A. 2d 537 (1963) and cases therein cited. Rigorous as are the duties imposed upon the unfavored driver in entering the public highway for the protection of the public and for the smooth flow of traffic, he is not a perpetual pariah; if he has observed the mandates of the law in entering the intersection and has become a part of the flow of traffic on the favored highway, he has the same rights and is subject to the same duties as the other drivers on that highway.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he trial court assumes the truth of all credible evidence on the issue and of all inferences fairly deducible therefrom, and considers them in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion is made.... If there is any legally relevant and competent evidence, however slight, from which a rational mind could infer a fact in issue, then, a trial court would be invading the province of the jury by declaring a directed verdict. In such circumstances, the cases should be submitted to the jury and [the motion] denied____”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “viewing the testimony in the light most favorable to [the unfavored driver], the trial court properly held that it was for the jury to determine whether or not [the unfavored driver] had cleared the intersection and reached a point where he did not interfere with [the favored driver's] right of way.”
    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.