Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 51 Okla. 347 - Patterson v. Seals

Patterson v. Seals’s Empirical Analysis

1915

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
February 1943
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 1943

8 state decisions

401915192019301940decided

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 Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Thompson · Florida Central & Peninsular Railroad v. Williams · Neeley v. Southwestern Cotton Seed Oil Co. · Stepp v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. · St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Darnell

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

  1. ““As a general rule it may be stated that negligence is a fact which must always be proved and will never be presumed. The mere fact that an accident.has happened does not authorize the inference of. negligence on defendant’s part, although it may be taken into consideration with other facts and circumstances of the case.””
    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.