Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 271 So. 2d 409 - Smith v. Walton

271 So. 2d 409 - Smith v. Walton’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
June 2012
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently June 2012

1 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

5019731980199020002010decided

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 Avery v. Collins · Layton v. COOK'S PHARMACY · Kelly v. Ludlum · Yazoo M.V.R. Co. v. Lee · 220 So. 2d 271 - Stewart v. White

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. “In the absence of a statute to the contrary, a pedestrian has the right to use and travel upon any portion of a public highway at any time of the day or night, "and his rights and the rights of one operating a vehicle thereupon are mutual, reciprocal, and equal." The operator of a motor vehicle owes to pedestrians walking along the highway the duty to exercise reasonable or ordinary care to avoid injuring them. Hence a motorist is guilty of negligence where he strikes a pedestrian walking along the highway, where in the exercise of reasonable care he should have but did not see him and could have avoided the accident. 7 Am.Jur.2d, Automobiles and Highway Traffic, § 400.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In the absence of a statute to the contrary, a pedestrian has the right to use and travel upon any portion of a public highway at any time of the day or night, and his rights and the rights of one operating a vehicle thereupon are mutual, reciprocal, and equal. The operator of a motor vehicle owes to pedestrians walking along the highway the duty to exercise reasonable or ordinary care to avoid injuring them.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Notwithstanding the provisions of this section every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian upon any roadway and shall give warning by sounding the horn when necessary and shall exercise proper precaution upon observing any child or any confused or incapacitated person upon a roadway.”
    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.