102 Md. App. 30 - Janelsins v. Button’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 6 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably 114 Md. App. 169 - Doe v. Archdiocese of Washington (1997), Nelson v. Carroll (1999)
4 federal appellate · 6 district · 18 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 3 Cal. 4th 296 - Knight v. Jewett · Hook v. State · State v. Hatfield · County Council v. Offen · Schroyer v. McNeal
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Because of the legitimate public policy of deterring and punishing intentional wrong-doing, the fact that a plaintiff “assumed the risk” that such wrongdoing would occur cannot bar recovery for the wrongs perpetrated. Although Button certainly knew that Janelsins was intoxicated and, after Janelsins began to resist forcibly, nevertheless eontin- ued to push Janelsins into his car, Button did not assume the risk of battery.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“jurisdictions that have considered the issue of assumption of risk as a defense to an intentional tort have overwhelmingly rejected its applicability”
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.