4 Wash. App. 814 - Stevens v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2001
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 65 Wash. 2d 421 - Baxter v. Greyhound Corp. · 62 Wash. 2d 136 - Helman v. Sacred Heart Hospital · 27 Wash. 2d 802 - Gardner v. Seymour · 73 Wash. 2d 804 - Detrick v. Garretson Packing Co. · 18 Wash. 2d 798 - Home Insurance v. Northern Pacific Railway 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Clearly, the issue of contributory negligence is a jury question unless the evidence is such that all reasonable minds would agree that the plaintiff had exercised the care which a reasonably prudent man would have exercised for his own safety under the circumstances.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“in determining whether or not the evidence presented ... is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of negligence, our task is only to determine whether the evidence when viewed most favorably toward the nonmoving party . . . allows room for men of reasonable minds to conclude that there is a greater probability that the accident happened in such a way that the trier of fact could determine the respondent to be negligent than there is that it did not so happen. Hernandez v. Western Farmers Ass'n, [ 76 Wn.2d 422 , 456 P.2d 1020 (1969)]; Mason v. Turner, 48 Wn.2d 145 , 291 P.2d 1023 (1956); Martin v. Insurance Co. of North America, 1 Wn. App. 218, 223 , 460 P.2d 682 (1969). Or, as stated in Gardner [Gardner v. Seymour, 27 Wn.2d 802, 808 , 180 P.2d 564 (1947)]: The test to be applied here is whether the jury could have determined that the appellants were liable as a reasonable inference from the evidence, or whether the verdict rests on conjecture.”
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.