Knudsen v. Arendt’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 15 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““THE COURT: Did you stop or slow up when you came up to that corner? “THE WITNESS: The second I seen her I hit the brake to slow down. “THE COURT: You hit the brake to slow down. When you saw her where ? You said you saw her 50 feet back. “THE WITNESS: Well, you could see a car and then you could see it moving so I suppose you couldn’t actually see her that far back. “THE COURT: You didn’t hit your brakes when you first saw her 50 feet back? “THE WITNESS: No. “THE COURT: No. You hit the brakes after you saw there was going to be a collision? “THE WITNESS: After I seen her coming in. That’s right. “THE COURT: And, as a matter of fact, did you figure she had the right of way? “THE WITNESS : Well, to my right; yes. “THE COURT: What is that? “THE WITNESS: That is why I stopped. She was to my right. “THE COURT: You figured she had the right of way. Why didn’t you stop before you had to put on your brakes so hard then ? “THE WITNESS: Well it looked like she was hesitating.” The general rules of the road provide: “When two vehicles enter an intersection from different highways at ap proximately the same time, the driver of the vehicle on the left shall yield the right of way to the vehicle on the right.” Section 39-10-22(2), N.D.C.C.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brower v. Stolz · Gage v. Kuhlmeier

2. ““It is clear that subsection 1 of Section 39-1017, NDRC 1943, applies to all cases in which vehicles approach the intersection at approximately the same time. Vehicles approach an.intersection at approximately the same time when there is imminent danger of collision at some point within the intersection if each maintains its established course and speed. Blashfield 'Cyc. of Automobile Law, § 993; n. 28 (Perm. ed. 1951) ; Fester v. George, 71 S.D. 424 , 25 N.W.2d 455 ; Gendron v. Glidden, 84 N.H. 162 , 148 A. 461 ; Prato v. Coffey, 135 Conn. 445 , 66 A.2d 113 ; Mattfeld v. Nester, 226 Minn. 106 , 32 N.W.2d 291 , 3 A.L.R.2d 909 . The words, ‘at approximately the same time’ do not mean ‘at precisely -the same instant’ and in ordér for' a vehicle entering an intersection from the left to secure a right of way by possession under subsection 3 of Section 39-1017, NDRC 1943, it must enter the intersection a sufficient interval of time ahead of a vehicle approaching from the right, so that it may be said the vehicles did not enter at approximately the same time. Such an interval must be of appreciable duration.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brower v. Stolz · Lusty v. Ostlie

3. ““There is no evidence in the record as to the lookout kept by either driver except such as may be contained in the inference that the accident would not have happened if they had kept a proper lookout. The inference is equally applicable to both drivers and there is no basis upon which a jury could found a conclusion that one driver kept a proper lookout and the other did not.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Johnson v. Sebens