McKinney v. Chambers’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently February 2008
13 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 Gardner v. Martin · U. S. Trust & Guaranty Co. v. Latex Const. Co. · Dallas Railway & Terminal Co. v. Hendrix · Bennett v. Arctic Insulation, Inc. · Hartford v. Coolidge-Locher Company
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““‘Negligence is a failure to observe a legal duty. Moreover, to constitute negligence at all, there must be a violation of a duty owed to the very person claiming on the ground of negligence. . . .’ “. . . in order for a defendant to be held to have been negligent, the injury to the plaintiff must have been foreseeable. . . . “. . . It can not be held that the appellee [defendant] could reasonably foresee that a thief would steal his car, negligently drive it, and injure a third party, and for such purpose hold the appellee liable.” (pp. 31, 32.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. George v. Breising
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.