Lucas v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 2019
3 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 Phipps Ex Rel. Phipps v. Bisceglia
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1) Violation of KRS 189.340(6)(a), which directs that the operator of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent having regard for traffic and road conditions; 2) Violation of KRS 189.390(1), which directs that the operator of a motor vehicle shall not operate the vehicle at a greater speed than is reasonable and prudent in light of traffic and road conditions; 3) violation of KRS 189.290(1), which directs all motorists to drive in a careful manner with regard for the safety and convenience of pedestrians and other vehicles on the highway; 4) violation of KRS 189.080(1), which requires the sounding of a horn or other sound device to warn of the approach of a motor vehicle.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Crowe v. Johnson“[A]ppellee's position seems to be that since there was an accident it is apparent that: (1) [appellant] was following too closely, (2) and was going too fast, (3) and was not careful and prudent, and (4) he didn't blow his horn at all, so he was negligent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Crowe v. Johnson
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.