Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 415 SW2D 251 - Nash v. Roden

Nash v. Roden’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
March 1983
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently March 1983

2 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

70196719701980decided

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 Garza v. Alviar · Benoit v. Wilson · Biggers v. Continental Bus System, Inc. · McAfee v. Travis Gas Corp. · Hopson v. Gulf Oil Corp.

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.

  1. ““In Texas, the rule is well established that the violation of a statutory duty is negligence per se, and that once the violation is established the only added finding necessary to establish a defendant’s liability is that the violation of the statutory duty was a proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. University of Texas: Calvert, Special Issues Under Article 6701d, 34 Texas L.Rev. 971 , 977 (1956). “This rule is not without exceptions, and once the violation has been proved, the defendant may then go forward and prove an excuse or justification for the violation. However, the burden is upon the party seeking to justify the violation to prove up an excuse or justification. Younger Bros. v. Marino, 198 S.W. 2d 109 , (Tex.Civ.App. Galveston, 1946, writ ref’d n. r. e.); 27 Texas L.Rev. 866 (1949).””
    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.