Sinai v. Polinger Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 19 district · 33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably Weinberg v. Johnson (1986), District of Columbia v. Peters (1987)
10 federal appellate · 19 district · 33 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 Scalza v. United States · Duncan v. Cessna Aircraft Co. · Kline v. 1500 Massachusetts Avenue Apartment Corp. · Morrison v. MacNamara · Anita Pritchard, Administratrix of the Estate of Otto E. Pritchard, Deceased v. Liggett & Myers Tobacco Company, a Corporation
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In evaluating the propriety of a contributory negligence instruction, the trial court must focus upon the objective reasonableness of the plaintiff’s conduct, and must determine whether the defendant has presented evidence that the plaintiff’s behavior in encountering the risk departed from the standard of care that is to be expected of the reasonable person in the plaintiff’s position. The plaintiff’s departure from the normal standard of conduct (his “fault”) deprives him of the right to assert that the defendant was also at fault. A contributory negligence instruction is appropriate only if the defense has borne its burden to put forth some evidence upon which a jury could find that the plaintiff, by encountering the risk ... departed from an objective standard of reasonable care.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“`uniform standard of conduct: that of reasonable care under the circumstances.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Did he do or fail to do something which a person using ordinary care would do or not do. Remember that ordinary care means that care, caution and attention which a reasonable person would exercise under similar circumstances. Bear in mind that the similar circumstances are those which confronted the doctor on December 2nd. If you find that he was confronted with an emergency situation, he is not held to the same conduct as one who had an opportunity to reflect on his situation.”
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.