Challinor v. Axton’s Empirical Analysis
1932
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently April 2011 · most notably Bartek v. Glasers Provisions Co. (1955), Law v. Gallegher (1938)
5 federal appellate · 31 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 Utilities Appliance Co. v. Toon's Administrator · Kennedy v. Wolf · Roselle v. Bingham · Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. McCoy · A. Downs & Brother v. Firemen's Insurance
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““One or two neighbors who did not witness the collision, but beard the crash, testified that they heard the 'roar’ of defendant’s automobile some thousand feet or more beyond tbe point of collision, and one of them (over the objections of defendant) testified that she judged from the noise of the roar that it was traveling some 50 or 60 miles per hour; but, clearly, that evidence was incompetent for two reasons: First, because of the distance from the scene, and, second, the inherent improbability of the accuracy of the conclusion of the witness from the premise on which it was based.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“'* * * Clearly, in such a case the owner (which is the wife in this case) by her consent and acquiescence selected her husband as a suitable person to, not only operate her car for her own purpose, but also to guard and protect her personal safety while traveling in her car with him as driver, and since the negligence of a stranger as her agreed chauffeur would be imputed to her, we conclude that the same principles should apply when her selected chauffeur is her husband.'”
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.