Chisholm v. JR SIMPLOT COMPANY’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently February 2011
3 federal appellate · 13 state decisions
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 Michigan v. Ohio · Ingersoll v. Liberty Bank of Buffalo · Brown v. General Motors Corp. · Anderson v. Klix Chemical Co. · Taylor v. Herbold
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.
““* * * Even if such a failure occurred, the plaintiffs still had to establish that the resulting weeds proximately caused the loss of their potato crop. * * * >;« ‡ ‡ $ “In an action based on breach of warranty, it is necessary to show that the breach of warranty was the proximate cause of the loss sustained. Where the record shows that there are several possible causes of an injury, for one or more of which the defendant was not responsible, and it is just as reasonable and probable that the injury was the result of the latter, the plaintiff may not recover, since he has failed to prove that the defendant’s breach caused the injury. The rule is stated as follows in 65A C. J. S. [Negligence, § 264, p. 928]: “ ‘where the evidence is such that a jury can do no more than guess or conjecture as to which of several acts, conditions, or agencies, not all of which can be charged to defendant, was in fact the efficient cause, it is for the court to decide as matter of law that plaintiff’s case has not been established.’ ” Chisholm v. J. B. Simplot Co. 94 Idaho 628, 631 , 495 P. 2d 1113, 1116 (1972).”
3 later decisions 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.