Smith v. Kilpatrick’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"We do not think this testimony raises an issue of fact which would warrant its submission to a jury as to whether any negligence on Mrs. Kilpatrick's part proximately caused or contributed to the injury and death of Vicki Smith. "In Hebert v. Lenart, 247 Miss. 494 , 153 So.2d 658 (1963), it was held that the burden of proving the child's position was upon the plaintiff. The Court said in 247 Miss. at 505, 153 So.2d at 662 : * * * the burden was on the plaintiff to show that the child was in the street a sufficient time before the collision, and in a place within the range of vision of the bus driver, for the defendant, in the exercise of ordinary care, to have seen him and avoided striking him. But, as stated above, there is no evidence as to when the child came into the intersection, how he got there, or what the position of the bus was when he got there." 254 Miss. at 160-61 , 180 So.2d at 609 . ... "In Berry v. Brunt, 252 Miss. 194 , 172 So.2d 398, 401 (1965), this Court said: In view of the fact that the burden of proof is upon the plaintiff, such circumstances must be ample and must appear from the evidence. Moreover, the evidence must not leave the causal connection a matter of conjecture; it must be something more consistent with plaintiff's theory as to how the accident occurred." ... "The trial court was correct in directing the jury to return a verdict for the defendant." 254 Miss. at 162 , 180 So.2d at 610 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cole v. Todd

2. “"Mrs. Kilpatrick said that, as she passed along the street, her right wheels were about two feet from the curb on her right hand side. She had not shifted out of low gear, and was traveling about five to ten miles per hour when she heard a bump or thud on her right front door. "She stopped her automobile, got out and went back, and found the little Smith girl lying in the driveway. She said she had not seen the child before the impact on her car door, the sound of which she had heard. "A subsequent examination of Mrs. Kilpatrick's automobile disclosed a smudged place in the mud or dirt on the right hand door about the place where she heard the sound. There was no physical or other evidence that any other part of Mrs. Kilpatrick's automobile had come in contact with the child." 254 Miss. at 159 , 180 So.2d at 608 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cole v. Todd

3. “Accepting this testimony at face value and assuming that one of the children referred to was Vicki Smith, the statements do not indicate that she was in the street when seen, or where she was with» reference to the street. There is nothing' in the statements from which a reasonable-inference may be drawn that the child, when seen, was in a position of such apparent peril that Mrs. Kilpatrick should have anticipated that she would run into' the street and into the side of the slowly moving car.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 193 So. 2d 729 - Moseley v. Bailey