Brixey v. Craig’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 13 state decisions

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

1. ““This court has frequently held that for one to violate a positive statutory inhibition is negligence per se, and not merely prima facie evidence of negligence. We do not question that rule. “Here, however, we are not dealing with a positive statutory inhibition. It is not made absolutely unlawful to approach an intersection, the view of which is obstructed, at a rate of speed greater than fifteen miles per hour, but this is prima facie unlawful, and we think it follows that if it is not absolutely unlawful it cannot be said to be absolutely negligent. We think it makes a prima facie case of negligence. “The presumption is that one approaching such an intersection at a rate of speed greater than fifteen miles per hour is doing so in violation of law and the presumption is that he is guilty of negligence, not less and not more than that. With the burden shifted by this presumption, negligence is still an issuable fact. [Last emphasis ours.] “The statutory law of Idaho on this subject, and the basic Uniform Act similar, adopted in many other states, apparently evade positive iron-clad rules, indeed this flexibility dependent upon different conditions is conspicuous. Courts interpreting these statutes in other states recognize that feature, and we think rightly so.” “We think the questions of negligence and contributory negligence, from the facts and circumstances in evidence in this case, were issues for the jury.” [Cited and approved in Hamilton v. Carpenter, 49 Ida. 629 , 290”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dawson v. Salt Lake Hardware Co.