Valencia v. Strayer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 20 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ * * * There is no claim of intentional injury here; absent that, it is our understanding of the principles already enunciated by this Court that there must be some substantial evidence of a particular state of mind upon the part of the defendant driver. That particular state of mind comprehends evidence of an utter irresponsibility on the part of defendant or of a conscious abandonment of any consideration for the safety of passengers; as indicated in State v. Clarkson, supra [ 58 N.M. 56 , 265 P.2d 670 ], there is a close alignment between the state of mind required by this statute and a state of mind sufficient to convict for involuntary manslaughter for a death resulting from the operation of an automobile. * * * ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hunt v. Dheel

2. ““* * * The fact that the driver had not been to bed the previous night does not justify an inference that he fell asleep and, even if he did, could not be considered as sufficient evidence of the required state of mind to bring about an exception to the statute in view of our ruling in DeBlassie v, McCrory, supra. * * * ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Simon v. Wilson