Edmonds v. Heil’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently May 2008 · most notably Ciomber v. Cooperative Plus, Inc. (2008), 5 Ill. App. 3d 910 - Collgood, Inc. v. Sands Drug Co. (1972)
8 federal appellate · 17 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 Josephine Throckmorton v. Washington Holt · Lord v. Steamship Co. · McClure v. Hoopeston Gas & Electric Co. · Feldman v. Chicago Railways Co. · Oakdale Building Corp. v. Smithereen Co.
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The presumption of defendants’ negligence was of course rebuttable and it was incumbent upon them to furnish an explanation of the occurrence of the fire consistent with due care on their part, if they could. Whether the evidence introduced by them in explanation of the occurrence of the fire was sufficient to rebut the presumption of their negligence was a question for the jury to determine.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““When a thing which has caused an injury is shown to be under the management of the party charged with negligence and the accident is such as in the ordinary course of things will not happen if those who have such management use proper care, the accident itself affords reasonable evidence, in the absence of an explanation by the parties charged, that it arose from the want of proper care. . . . The rule is that negligence is never presumed, but that the circumstances surrounding the case where the maxim of res ipsa loquitur applies, amount to evidence from which the facts of negligence may be found; that is, in a case within the maxim of res ipsa loquitur, proof of the circumstances of such case and of the injury constitutes a prima facie case of negligence, and will justify a verdict unless such prima facie case is overcome by proof showing that the party charged is not at fault.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The origin of a fire has generally been held sufficiently established by inferences drawn from slight circumstantial evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.