Clayton v. McCullough

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that “we are not bound by § 876(b) of the Restatement 2d, as it has not been adopted by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court”
• passenger and driver of car had no agency relationship so that negligence of latter would be imputed to former
• no recovery was possible under section 876 where there were no factual averments indicating that the passenger gave substantial assistance or encouragement to the driver to engage in tortious conduct

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., Ltd.
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1996-10-18· cited 836×
• Ferry v. Fisher
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1998-03-04· cited 57×
• Stanziale v. Pepper Hamilton LLP (In Re Student Finance Corp.)
  D. Delaware· 2005-12-22· cited 51×
• Rachlin v. Edmison
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2002-12-13· cited 37×
• Daniel Boone Area School Dist. v. Lehman Brothers, Inc.
  W.D. Pennsylvania· 2002-02-05· cited 27×
• Krasny v. Bagga (In Re Jamuna Real Estate LLC)
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2007-04-25· cited 23×
• Welc v. Porter
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1996-04-19· cited 21×
• Willard v. Interpool, Ltd.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-08-15· cited 21×
• Brandjord v. Hopper
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1997-01-14· cited 19×
• Champion Ex Rel. Ezzo v. Dunfee
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 2008-01-31· cited 7×
• Shinn v. Allen
  Tex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 1998-12-10· cited 5×
• Smith v. Haggerty
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2001-10-03· cited 2×
• Giovan v. St. Thomas Diving Club, Inc.
  Virgin Islands· 1997-06-13· cited 1×
• Connick v. Suzuki
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1996-10-18
• McConnell v. Bara
  Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas· 2005-03-22