Hackman v. Beckwith’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 54 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently July 1998 · most notably Schmitt v. Jenkins Truck Lines, Inc. (1969), Law Ex Rel. Law v. Hemmingsen (1958)
8 federal appellate · 54 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 Davidson v. Vast · Shafer v. State Ex Rel. Sundergill · Waterloo Savings Bank v. Waterloo, Cedar Falls & Northern Railroad · Thornbury v. Maley · Hayes v. Stunkard
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘There was evidence * * * that defendants’ vehicle was on its left-hand side. As said in Pazen v. Des Moines Transportation Co., 223 Iowa 23, 27, 28 , 272 N.W. 126 , [129], unless we are to presume it was driven there willfully, there arises a fair inference of failure to keep a proper lookout. Motorists do not ordinarily drive on the left in the face of a near approaching vehicle if they see it coming; and if they do not, the question of lookout may become a material one, proper for the jury’s consideration.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In addition, appellants' requested Instruction No. 6 was in substance and meaning identical with that given by the court to which objection is now made; and it is elementary a litigant cannot complain of error which he has invited or to which he has assented.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Carey““These tire tracks, the respective weights of the two trucks, the fact that the outfit driven by the plaintiff’s decedent was a combined unit, which would make it most difficult to drive both the tractor and trailer to the right after the collision, so that”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Weppler v. Smith
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.