Koch v. Cantin’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 197 So. 2d 524 - Connolly v. Steakley · 133 So. 2d 301 - Douglas v. Hackney · Perdue v. Copeland · 192 So. 2d 796 - Wiggen v. Bethel Apostolic Temple · 201 So. 2d 775 - Wilder v. Van Dorn
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The rule that emerges from Douglas [v. Hackney, Fla.1961, 133 So.2d 301 ] and cases which follow, Perdue v. Copeland, Fla. 1969, 220 So.2d 617 ; Williamson v. Guerra, Fla.App. 1968, 208 So.2d 302 ; Wiggen v. Bethel Apostolic Temple, Fla.App. 1966, 192 So.2d 796 , is that adequate evidentiary support must exist for an instruction on last clear chance to be given. Based upon the facts of the case sub judice, to require the trial judge to instruct the jury on the hypothesis that defendant should have seen decedent in the roadway prior to the time he actually saw him, would be to authorize a verdict entirely upon conjecture.””
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.