Asher v. Griffin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. ““The Court instructs the jury that if you find and believe from the credible evidence that on November 5, 1959, plaintiff was riding as a passenger in a 1952 Plymouth automobile being driven by Miss Ann McGonigle and that plaintiff was at all times exercising ordinary care for her own safety, if so, and that the said Plymouth automobile made a right turn from 9th Street to go south on Central Street, and that the defendant turned his Cadillac automobile to the left from 9th Street to go south on Central and that thereafter the said Cadillac collided with the side of the left front fender of said Plymouth and that as a direct result of said collision plaintiff was injured and that prior to said collision the defendant negligently failed to exercise the highest degree of care to keep a careful and continuous lookout for vehicles in motion at and near 9th and Central and in particular the automobile in which plaintiff was riding, and defendant was thereby negligent, if you so find, and that as a direct result of such failure said collision occurred, then, if you so find, your verdict, must be in favor of plaintiff on plaintiff’s petition.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Clark v. Portman

2. “"[1, 2] It is the duty of the operator of a motor vehicle to keep a careful or vigilant lookout ahead for other vehicles on or near the highway; and in order to fulfill this duty he must look in such an observant manner as to enable him to see and discover such conditions as one, in the exercise of the highest degree of care for his own safety and the safety of others, would be expected to see under like or similar circumstances. (Citing cases.) This duty is uniform and constant and, if the driver of a motor vehicle under such duty fails to see what is plainly visible, he is guilty of negligence and liable for its consequences. (Citing cases.)””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Pollard ex rel. Pollard v. Decker

3. ““ * * * The above cases aré not to be construed as requiring a submission of evidentiary facts not necessary or essential to a finding upon the issue or issues specifically submitted. Knight v. Richey, supra [ 363 Mo. 293 , 250 S.W.2d 972 ]. “The Instruction did submit facts essential in law to support a verdict for plaintiff, of which there was substantial evidence, and in our opinion the inclusion of further evidentiary matters was not necessary to the validity of the Instruction.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Pollard ex rel. Pollard v. Decker