Maddocks v. Bennett’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 2023
21 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 Treadwell v. Nickel · Beaulieu v. Elliott · City of Fairbanks v. Nesbett · Rocky Mountain Trucking Co. v. Taylor · Weiss v. Axler
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.
“"In summary some courts openly allow discretion to the trial judge to allow hypotheticals with immaterial variances to go to the jury. Most courts state that the facts in a hypothetical question must be supported by some evidence, but they usually mean the material facts. We believe that consistent with the liberal attitude toward expert opinion and hypothetical questions which this court has already adopted, the appropriate procedure is to allow immaterial variances to go to the jury with the appropriate cautionary instructions." [4]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Davis v. Chism · Haisley v. Grant““Even less applicable to the present case than res ipsa loquitur is appellee’s analogy to violation-of-statute cases, e. g., Rogers v. Dubiel, 373 P.2d 295 (Alaska 1962). These cases are only concerned with the negligence of the act and not with causation in fact. * * * Violation of statute cases really have nothing to do with causation * .* * [A] violation of a statute only determines if the actor’s conduct is negligent. A reasonable man is presumed to be a lawful one. Whether the unlawful and hence negligent actions cause the damage is a separate inquiry.” 12”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ferrell v. Baxter““In Maddocks , we reaffirmed our liberal view favoring the admission of expert testimony if based upon sufficient facts and if the trial judge believes that the jury could receive ‘appreciable assistance’ from it. In such cases, a ruling admitting expert testimony . . . will not be disturbed on appeal unless an abuse of discretion is shown.” (Footnote omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Davis v. Chism
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.