Braun v. Hoffmeister’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently May 1996
9 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 Lilly v. Boswell · Mayfield v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co. · Chenoweth v. McBurney · Faught Ex Rel. Faught v. Washam · Witt v. Peterson
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The degree of care of a motorist upon the highway, as required by statute, § 304.010 R.S.Mo.1959, V.A. M.S., imposes upon the operator of motor vehicles upon the streets and highways of this state the continuous duty to exercise the highest degree of care at all times and all places thereon to keep a lookout for persons thereon and in every other respect. Mayfield v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co., 337 Mo. 79 , 85 S. W.2d 116,123-124 [11-16]; Faught v. Washam, 365 Mo. 1021 , 291 S.W. 2d 78, 82 [4]. To fulfill that duty, the motorist is required to look in such an observant manner as to enable him to see what a person in the highest degree of care for the safety of himself and others would be expected to see under similar circumstances.””
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.