Duncan v. Beck’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““As the result of the abrasions received by appellant, Jake Duncan, he has some small scars upon his right knee. His physician testified that the scars can only be seen upon close examination of the knee. It is appellants’ contention that these scars give rise to a permanent disfigurement under KRS 304.39-060(2)(b). To support their position, appellants cite several Kentucky cases that deal with the issue of permanency of scarring and also quote the definition of ‘disfigurement’ which is contained in Black’s Law Dictionary. That definition is as follows: ‘That which impairs or injures the beauty, symmetry or appearance of a person or thing, that which renders unsightly, misshapen or imperfect or deforms in some manner.’ “When the legislature enacted KRS 304.39-010 et seq., it was their intention to limit tort claims arising out of automobile accidents. This limitation only permits claims of those with serious injuries. Given the facts presented concerning the small scars on the knee of appellant, Jake Duncan, this court does not believe that such injuries constitute ‘disfigurement’ under the statute.” 553 S.W.2d at 478 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Smith v. Marshall