Robinson v. Cable’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
145 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 145 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably 8 Cal. 4th 548 - Soule v. General Motors Corp. (1994), 36 Cal. 3d 752 - Seaman's Direct Buying Service, Inc. v. Standard Oil Co. (1984)
145 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 People v. Haeussler · 24 Cal. 2d 133 - Oettinger v. Stewart · Daniels v. City & County of San Francisco · 37 Cal. 2d 89 - Miller v. Peters · Marchetti v. Southern Pacific Co.
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 145 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The plaintiff is not responsible for any act or omission of the driver of the car in which he was riding. Therefore, unless you find some negligent conduct on his own part which contributed as a proximate cause of his injury, the plaintiff may not be found contributorily negligent. “A rider in a motor vehicle who has no right to the control or management of such vehicle nevertheless has the duty to exercise ordinary care for his own safety and take such steps to protect himself as a person of ordinary prudence would take under the same circumstances. It is for you to determine from all of the evidence what conduct might reasonably have been expected of a person of ordinary prudence in the same circumstances. “In the absence of some fact brought to his attention which would cause a person of ordinary prudence to act otherwise, such rider is not charged with the responsibility of observing the condition of the traffic on the highway. However, if the rider is aware that the driver is not looking for other vehicular traffic or is driving the vehicle in a negligent manner or is violating the law, or that another motor vehicle is approaching the intersection and is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard to those in the rider’s vehicle, he has the duty of doing whatever a person of ordinary prudence in the same situation would do to inform or warn the driver in an effort to prevent an accident. “Any negligence of Robert Riddick will not bar his recovery of damages in this ca”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[w]here it seems probable that the jury's verdict may have been based on the erroneous instruction....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The fact that only the bare number of jurors required to reach a verdict agreed upon the verdict”
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.