Young v. Guild’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
32
cited by 32 later decisions
2
states following
December 2018
most recently cited
32 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 860 So. 2d 704 - Howell v. State · 799 So. 2d 1 - Whitten v. Cox · 608 So. 2d 1149 - Flight Line, Inc. v. Tanksley · 542 So. 2d 914 - Hentz v. State · Hill v. Dunaway
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A cause constitutes a proximate cause of an injury when such injury results from a chain of a natural and unbroken sequence from the defendant’s negligent act. A defendant is not liable for damages which are remote or collateral, or which result from a remote, improbable, or extraordinary occurrence, although such occurrence is within the range of possibilities flowing from the defendants’ negligent act. If you find from a preponderance of the evidence that the death of Preston Jimmy Utz resulted from a chain of natural and unbroken sequence (sic) from the defendants’ failure to comply with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, then your verdict shall be for the plaintiff. However, if you find the death of Preston Jimmy Utz was the result of a remote, improbable, or extraordinary occurrence, although within the range of possibilities flowing from the defendants’ negligence, your verdict shall be for the defendants.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“'Regarding jury instructions, the trial court possesses considerable discretion. Bickham v. Grant, 861 So.2d 299, 301 (¶ 8) (Miss.2003). A party is entitled to a jury instruction if it concerns a genuine issue of material fact and there is credible evidence to support the instruction. Mariner Health Care, Inc. v. Estate of Edwards, 964 So.2d 1138, 1156 (¶ 48) (Miss.2007). While a party is entitled to jury instructions that present his theory of the case,, this entitlement is limited; the trial court may refuse an instruction which incorrectly states the law, is covered fairly elsewhere in the instructions, or is without foundation in the evidence. Ford v. State, 975 So.2d 859, 863 (¶ 11) (Miss.2008).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that the psychiatrist was guilty of negligence which caused the injury. In this case, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that [the defendant] was negligent in his treatment of [the decedent] and that such negligence, if any, caused her suicide.”
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.