Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 77 Idaho 270 - Rosevear v. Rees

Rosevear v. Rees’s Empirical Analysis

1955

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
September 1975
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently September 1975

7 state decisions

40195519601970decided

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 16 Cal. App. 2d 676 - Linde v. Emmick · Ineas v. Union Pac. R. Co. · McKee v. Chase · Shipway v. Monise · Mingus v. Olsson

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

  1. “"Crossing at other than cross walks. —(a) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked cross walk or within an unmarked cross walk at an intersection shall yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway.” I.C. § 49-735: "Drivers to exercise due care. — Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this article, every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian upon any roadway and shall give warning by sounding the horn when necessary and shall exercise proper precaution upon observing any child or any confused or incapacitated person upon a roadway.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““In the case at bar the negligence of appellant is not an open question as his actions constituted negligence per se. As to the proximate cause of the accident, there is no evidence to invoke the doctrine of last clear chance or to indicate that the accident would have occurred regardless of whether appellant was on a crosswalk or in the middle of the block. There can be no other reasonable interpretation of the evidence than that the negligence of appellant proximately caused or contributed to his injury.””
    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.