Kline v. Kachmar’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 63 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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““As to the plaintiff, even though he did have the right-of-way, it was, of course, his duty to look both to his right and left for any approaching traffic on College Street before entering the intersection and to continue so to look while crossing the intersecting street . . . While it does not appear from the printed record that the plaintiff was specifically interrogated as to whether he had observed that duty, neither is there any evidence that he did not do what he should have done in the circumstances; and the burden of proving contributory negligence was upon the defendant. Nor does the fact that the plaintiff testified that he ‘didn’t see nothing’ upon looking up and down College Street convict him conclusively either of not having looked or of not having seen what was visible. Even if the truck at the time was somewhere on College Street to the west of Green, the plaintiff, being on a through highway with a Stop sign facing traffic on College Street, was under no obligation to look all the way down the street to ascertain whether or not some notorist was coming at a reckless reate fof speed that would carry him across the intersection in defiance of the warning... The plaintiff was not required ot anticipate and guard against a want of ordinary care the part of the defendant... Under the evidence in the case, the trial judge could not properly have declared the plaintiff guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. McCune v. Ellenberger · B.S. Mitchell v. M.M. Milburn