Sandoval v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
June 1966
most recently cited
34 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Thompson v. Anderman · State Ex Rel. Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Shain · Auel v. White · Chandler v. Battenfield · Gray v. Esslinger
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We are not unmindful of the prevailing rule that plaintiff’s contributory negligence, if any, ordinarily is a question for the jury. Notwithstanding this general rule, however, where reasonable minds cannot differ upon the question and they come readily to the conclusion that the plaintiff was negligent and that his negligence contributed proximately with that of defendant to cause the injury complained of, it should be so declared as a matter of law. (Citing cases.)””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Whether the plaintiff has been guilty of contributory negligence barring a recovery is nearly always a question for the jury under proper instructions by the. court. It is rarely the case the facts are such that the court can say as a matter of law that plaintiff is himself such an offender against the rules of the road as to deny him recovery. Yet, on occasions it does thus appear and when it does, the court should not and will not hesitate so to declare. Gray v. Esslinger, 46 N.M. 421 , 130 P.2d 24 , and cases cited. We think this is not such a case, even though strongly relied upon by counsel for defendant in support of the motion to dismiss.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““ * * * it is difficult to see how anyone can claim freedom from negligence or that such act did not contribute proximately to his injuries when he steps out into a street in front of two cars approaching so closely that he is attempting to cross in the light thrown by the cars, and at the same time is giving attention to another car parked some distance ahead, and then when aware that the cars are upon him stops in the lane of travel of these cars and is thereupon struck by one of them.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Garcia v. Sanchez
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.