Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 269 SO2D 415 - State v. Redden

State v. Redden’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
December 1996
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 1996

5 state decisions

30197219801990decided

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 Bessie Cannon v. State of Florida · 116 So. 2d 16 - Carraway v. Revell · State v. Smith · Russ v. State · 236 So. 2d 180 - Glaab v. Caudill

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

  1. “Redden also argues that if the child had not run into the road the accident would not have occurred. This argument is fallacious. What is charged here is Redden's culpable negligence, and the deceased's conduct may be a factor ... in demonstrating the absence of culpable negligence, but contributory negligence is no defense. In Russ v. State, 1939, 140 Fla. 217 , 191 So. 296 , the deceased was walking across a busy highway, and it was shown that the defendant had driven off the road in an effort at avoidance. Only an allegedly excessive speed grounded the charge of culpable negligence. The Supreme Court stated ( 191 So. at 299 ), "the deceased when crossing the highway was charged with the exercise of such care as was necessary for her own self preservation." That dictum is unfortunate if it encourages belief in a "but for" rule in manslaughter prosecutions. Of course the deceased's conduct may be relevant to the question of culpable negligence on the defendant's part, but it would not even be a valid defense in a civil action founded on gross negligence, which is of lesser degree than culpable negligence.”
    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.