Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 75 N.M. 601 - Grubb v. Wolfe

Grubb v. Wolfe’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
7
states following
August 2012
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently August 2012 · most notably Carrow Co. v. Lusby (1990), Romero v. Byers (1994)

32 state decisions

100196519701980199020002010decided

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 Stambaugh v. Hayes · Lucero Ex Rel. Lucero v. Torres · Frei v. Brownlee · Baros v. Kazmierczwk · Zamora v. Smalley

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.

  1. ““ * * * The proper test is whether there is- any evidence from which the jury could possibly conclude that the accident occurred without-the negligence of anyone being the proximate cause. * * ””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Time and progress have forged the change. While we are still primarily a livestock raising state, our ranches are now criss-crossed with highways carrying many cars and many people at high speeds. Considerations of public health and safety demand that no different rule apply when an owner permits his livestock to cross and re-cross a busy road from that which applies if he himself were crossing and re-crossing on horseback or in a wagon or automobile. In either event, his conduct must be that of a reasonable and prudent person.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “■ The foregoing- authorities establish that the owner of livestock has a duty to care for his property as a reasonable man, and that he may be liable for injuries to motorists resulting from collisions with his animals due to his negligence in permitting them to be on the highway.”
    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.