Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 3 Ariz. App. 147 - Schmidt v. Gibbons

3 Ariz. App. 147 - Schmidt v. Gibbons’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
January 1991
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 1991

6 state decisions

201966197019801990decided

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 Layton v. Rocha · Butane Corporation v. Kirby · Alires v. Southern Pacific Company · Trojanovich v. Marshall · Coyner Crop Dusters v. Marsh

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

  1. ““I instruct you that the driver of an automobile at night is negligent if he collides with an object which he has failed to see, and which an ordinarily prudent driver, under like circumstances, would have seen and with reasonable care could have avoided. “If you find that plaintiff’s decedent, Frank J. Schmidt, negligently failed to control his vehicle, and negligently failed to see the defendant’s truck and trailer, and that this negligence proximately caused or proximately contributed to the cause of his death, then the plaintiff is not entitled to recover.” (Emphasis supplied)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “There is no mysterious logical fatality in basing `one expert opinion upon another'; it is done every day in business and in applied science.”
    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.