Thompson v. Havard

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that evidence of eleven moving violations within three years prior to the accident was sufficient evidence to submit the issue of incompetency to the jury
• finding a driver incompetent based on eleven moving violations in the space of three years
• “[Pjroof of two moving violations or accidents within a two year period prior to [the] accident ... is probably insufficient [to create a fact issue of the driver’s incompetence.]”
• “[Pjroof of two moving violations or accidents within a two year period prior to [this] accident ... is probably insufficient [to create a fact issue of the driver’s incompetence.]”
• “ ‘[P]roof of only one previous traffic violation is grossly inadequate to establish incompetency.’’’
• “proof of two moving violations or accidents within a two year period prior to the accident made the basis of the suit is probably insufficient [to create a fact issue of the driver’s incompetence]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).