Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 471 N.E.2d 1211 - Crull v. Platt

Crull v. Platt’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
states following
May 2014
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently May 2014 · most notably Peters v. Forster (2004), Bammerlin v. Navistar International Transportation Corp. (1994)

2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

1301984199020002010decided

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 Elder v. Fisher · Havert v. Caldwell · 171 Ind. App. 14 - Petroski v. Northern Indiana Public Service Co. · 141 Ind. App. 42 - New York Central R. Co. v. CAVINDER, ETC. · 174 Ind. App. 1 - Fruehauf Trailer Division v. Thornton

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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Under common law, independent intervening conduct precludes the original wrongdoer’s liability when the later conduct constitutes a cause interrupting the natural sequence of events, turning aside their course, preventing the natural and probable result of the original act or omission, and producing a result that could not have been reasonably anticipated.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “defendant's negligence merely creates a condition by which the subsequent injury producing acts of another are made possible, the existence of the first condition cannot be the proximate cause of the injuries, but is a remote cause.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “does not mean that the precise hazard or exact consequence should have been foreseen, but neither does it encompass anything which might occur.”
    2 later decisions 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.