31 Tenn. App. 577 - Morris v. Bolling’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently June 2006 · most notably 43 Cal. 2d 60 - Richards v. Stanley (1954), Hergenrether v. East (1964)
4 federal appellate · 38 state decisions
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 Schaff v. R. W. Claxton, Inc. · Jackson v. B. Lowenstein Bros., Inc. · 333 Ill. App. 359 - Ostergard v. Frisch · Deming & Co. v. Merchants' Cotton-press, etc., Co. · Southeastern Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Groves
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We [are] unable to find any eases on the precise question presented here. Courts in other states have decided that where an owner or his agent leaves an automobile unattended with the key in the ignition in violation of a statute or ordinance and a thief drives the automobile away and negligently injures plaintiff or causes property damage, the defendant’s violation of the statute or ordinance has been held to be negligence and constituted ‘proximate cause’ so as to render defendant liable in damages therefor.” (Citing cases.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Justus v. Wood““whether the defendants’ agent under the circumstances might or ought to have foreseen the result of his acts and whether said acts contributed to the damages plaintiff sustained were jury questions and not issues to be determined by the Court as matters of law, they being questions about which men of reasonable minds would differ.” (Citing decisions of our Court.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Justus v. Wood“‘ ‘ The rule is well established in this State that if an injury occurs from two causes, both due to the negligence of different persons, but together constituting an efficient cause, all persons whose acts contribute to the injury are liable therefor, and the negligence of one does not excuse the negligence of the other. ’ ’”
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.