Hebert v. Missouri PR Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 2016
19 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 Canter v. Koehring Company · 341 So. 2d 332 - Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc. · Jackson v. Cook · 339 So. 2d 780 - United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company v. State, Department of Highways · Smith v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If a crossing is unusually dangerous because the view of the motorist is so obstructed as to require that he place himself in a position of peril dangerously near the tracks, before he has a view of the oncoming train, the railroad company will be held liable, unless it can show that it took unusual precautions, such as reducing the speed of the train, or increasing its warning or providing signaling devices, etc. Hebert v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Co., 366 So.2d 608 (La. App. 3rd Cir. 1978), writ den. 369 So.2d 153 (La.1979), citing Glisson v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Co., 158 So.2d 875 (La. App. 3rd Cir. 1963).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In order to hold the Department of Highways liable for an accident caused by an unsafe or hazardous condition it must be shown that the Highway Department had prior notice, either actual or constructive, of the dangerous condition and had sufficient opportunity to remedy same or at least to alert and warn motorists of its presence and failed to do so. `The test for deciding whether there was an unsafe or hazardous condition is whether or not the highway was maintained in a reasonably safe condition for persons exercising ordinary care and prudence.'" (Citations omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"The duty of the Department of Highways to the traveling public is set forth in the case of Barnes v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, 350 So.2d 288 (La. App. 3rd Cir.1977), writ refused 352 So. 2d 239 (1977), wherein this court held as follows: `The law is settled that the Highway Department is not responsible for every accident which may occur on the state highways, nor is it a guarantor of the safety of travelers thereon, or an insurer against all injury or damage which may result from obstructions or defects in such highways. (Citations omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.