Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 477 S.W.2d 725 - State v. Todd

State v. Todd’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
May 1993
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently May 1993

17 state decisions

120197219801990decided

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 Ambrose v. M. F. A. Co-Operative Ass'n of St. Elizabeth · State v. Tevis · City of Raytown v. Roach · State v. Holmes · State v. Reynolds

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

  1. “Every person operating a motor vehicle on the highways of this state shall drive the vehicle in a careful and prudent manner and at a rate of speed so as not to endanger the property of another or the life or limb of any person and shall exercise the highest degree of care.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The general rule, to be responsible for careless and imprudent driving, is that an act which is made a separate offense, or which may not be a separate offense in itself, cannot be punished as careless and imprudent driving unless the act, in connection with other circumstances constitutes careless driving. State v. Tevis, [ 340 S.W.2d 415, 418-19 (Mo.App.1960) ]. To constitute the offense there must be conduct which shows under all the circumstances and under the conditions existing at the time, that the property of another or the life or limb of any person is endangered. When such circumstances and conditions are shown, the defendant has been found guilty of careless driving. State v. Tevis, supra; State v. Richards, [ 429 S.W.2d 351 (Mo. App.1968) ]; State v. Cipolla, 437 S.W.2d 162 [ (Mo.App.1968) ].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““ * * * The general rule, to be responsible for careless and imprudent driving, is that an act which is made a separate offense, or which may not be a separate offense in itself, cannot be punished as careless and imprudent driving unless the act, in connection with other circumstances constitutes careless driving. * * * ” (Emphasis supplied)”
    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.