Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 N.M. 34 - Blackburn v. State

Blackburn v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
3
states following
November 2014
most recently cited

2 district · 35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently November 2014 · most notably Bober v. New Mexico State Fair (1991), Rutherford v. Chaves County (2003)

2 district · 35 state decisions

1501982199020002010decided

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 Loucks v. Albuquerque National Bank · Methola v. County of Eddy · Jewell v. Seidenberg · Farmington National Bank v. Basin Plastics, Inc. · STATE, BY & THROUGH DEPT. OF HYS. v. Helehan

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

  1. “Plaintiffs cause of action against defendants, State of New Mexico, State Highway Department and State Engineer, is based upon and must meet the requirements of the law relating to the liability of a public entity for a dangerous condition of public property. Before the plaintiff may be entitled to your verdict under this law, against defendants, State of New Mexico, State Highway Department and State Engineer, you must find from a preponderance of the evidence: First: That Intersection at State Road 85, State Road 6 in Los Lunas, New Mexico was in a dangerous condition on April 14, 1979; Second: That the injury of which plaintiff complains was proximately caused by the dangerous condition; Third: That the injury occurred in a way which was reasonably foreseeable as a consequence of the dangerous condition of the property; and Fourth: That either: (a) The dangerous condition was created by a negligent or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the defendants, State of New Mexico, State Highway Department and State Engineer, acting within the scope of his employment, or (b) The defendants, State of New Mexico, State Highway Department and State Engineer, had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition a sufficient time prior to the time of the accident so that measures could have been taken to protect against the dangerous condition.”
    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.