Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 256 N.C. 351 - Redden v. Bynum

Redden v. Bynum’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
November 1997
most recently cited

2 district · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently November 1997 · most notably Superior Foods, Inc. v. Harris-Teeter Super Markets, Inc. (1975), Smith v. Corsat (1963)

2 district · 20 state decisions

1801962197019801990decided

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 Mitchell v. . Melts · Hoke v. Atlantic Greyhound Corp. · Cox v. Lee · Johnson v. Heath · Winfield v. Smith

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

  1. “The fact that the speed of a vehicle is less than the maximum limit provided by law ‘shall not relieve the driver from the duty to decrease speed . . . when special hazards exist with respect to . . . other traffic or by reason of weather conditions, and speed shall be decreased as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person, vehicle, or other conveyance on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirements and duty of all persons to use due care. G.S. 20-141(c). Failure to observe this statutory duty renders a motorist negligent; and such negligence may consist of traveling at excessive speed, failure to keep a proper lookout, or failure to maintain reasonable control of vehicle.”
    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.