Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 320 Md. 674 - Morris v. Weddington

Morris v. Weddington’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
March 2016
most recently cited

2 district · 22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently March 2016

2 district · 22 state decisions

100199020002010decided

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 Allstate Insurance v. Atwood · Snowhite v. State, Use of Tennant · Jones v. Federal Paper Board Co. · Allstate Insurance v. Miller · Takoma Park Bank v. Abbott

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

  1. “[T]he plaintiffs attorney made reference to the possible fact that the defendant was not insured to drive the van. I remember that this question was not allowed. I think if this fact ends up having bearing on our damages judgment, perhaps we should check the court record to be sure about this fact; that is, is the question admissible or not.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) whether a health insurance carrier had paid any portion of [the child’s] medical expenses, (2) whether, if the jury found Weddington negligent, the insurance company would be able to recover its payment from him, and (3) whether [the child’s mother] must reimburse the insurance carrier for any medical expenses awarded her.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “None of the questions asked by you are issues in this case. You are only to decide whether or not the defendant was or was not negligent. If he was negligent, then you are to decide what, if any, damages [the child’s mother] sustained and what, if any, damages the minor child sustained.”
    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.