State v. Tamanaha’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently May 2008 · most notably State v. Hernandez (1980), State v. Cummings (1967)
40 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 Glasser v. United States · United States v. Manton · People v. Grogan · Silver v. Silver · Pekelis v. Transcontinental & Western Air, Inc.
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The test on appeal is not whether guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt, but whether there is substantial evidence to support the conclusion of the trier of fact." 49 Haw. at 533 , 423 P.2d at 445 , quoting from State v. Tamanaha, 46 Haw. 245, 251 , 377 P.2d 688, 692 (1962).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“"It is significant that in the 1941 legislative session the territorial legislature, while enacting the negligent homicide statute, which specifically excludes the concepts of wilfullness or wantonness and ties the word `reckless' in with the terms `careless' and `negligent,' at the same time amended what is now R.L.H. 1955, § 311-1 by substituting the word `carelessly' in place of the term `furiously.' "This would seem to indicate a legislative intent to make ordinary negligence the standard of conduct under both the negligent homicide and the `careless and heedless' driving statutes. The word `furiously' is certainly more indicatory of wilful and wanton conduct than the term `carelessly' which negates such notion."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bunn“"* * * `recklessness' is more than `negligence' and generally implies lack of care coupled with disregard for consequences, and conduct which is more than negligent may be reckless without being wilful or wanton. Skalla v. Daeges, 234 Iowa 1260 , 15 N.W.2d 638, 642 . Or, as aptly stated in La Marra v. Adam, 164 Pa.Super. 268 , 63 A.2d 497 , 501: `"Recklessness implies conscious appreciation of the probable extent of danger or risk incident to contemplated action, while negligence in the legal sense implies knowledge only of a probable source of danger in the act." Lloyd v. Noakes, 96 Pa.Super. 164, 168 .'" State v. Tamanaha, supra. 46 Haw. 245, at 248 , 377 P.2d 688, at 690-691 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bunn
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.