Boyer v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 federal appellate · 14 district · 99 state decisions

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

1. “[n]egligent operation of a car is not limited to the negligent manipulation of the gas pedal, steering wheel, or brake pedal.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Barbre v. Pope · 202 Wis. 2d 290 - Estate of Cavanaugh v. Andrade

2. “[viewing allegations in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, we nevertheless hold that Trooper Titus’s alleged conduct did not amount to gross negligence as a matter of law. The plaintiff’s allegations that Trooper Titus drove at high speeds on a road congested with traffic in an attempt to apprehend a suspected intoxicated driver do not indicate that he acted with wanton or reckless disregard for the safety of others. Although the complaint states that Trooper Titus did not “immediately” activate his emergency equipment, these somewhat vague allegations do not support the conclusion that he acted with gross negligence.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 89 Md. App. 314 - Khawaja v. Mayor of Rockville · 127 Md. App. 271 - Pagotto v. State

3. “It must be remembered that the police officer’s conduct should be judged not by hindsight but should be viewed in light of how a reasonably prudent police officer would respond faced with the same difficult emergency situation. The officer is not to be held to the same coolness and accuracy of judgment of one not involved in an emergency vehicle pursuit. Any officer, confronted with the situation where an individual who poses a threat to others refuses to stop, and instead attempts to flee at a high rate of speed, must make a split-second decision as how to respond. Risks • are attendant upon the officer’s decision to pursue and on his decision not to pursue. A high-speed chase may aggravate an already dangerous situation by causing a driver who appears to be operating his vehicle dangerously to do so at higher speeds. On the other hand, if the officer does not pursue an individual believed to be dangerous on the road, such as an intoxicated driver, that individual may nonetheless continue on a dangerous course of conduct and seriously injure someone.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Richardson v. McGriff