Wool v. Larner’s Empirical Analysis
1942
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 4 district · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently July 2014 · most notably Forcier v. Grand Union Stores, Inc. (1970), Garafano v. Neshobe Beach Club, Inc. (1967)
3 federal appellate · 4 district · 28 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 B. Shoninger Co. v. Mann · Marwedel v. Cook · Gordon v. Cummings · Readman v. Conway · Coupe v. Platt
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Sec. 330. A licensee is a person who is privileged to enter or remain upon land by virtue of the possessor’s consent, whether given by invitation or permission. "Sec. 331. A gratuitous licensee is any licensee other than a business visitor as defined in Sec. 332. This includes social guests. "Sec. 332. A business visitor is one who is invited or permitted to enter or remain on land in the possession of another for a purpose directly or indirectly connected with business dealings between them.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lomberg v. Renner“was one (a business visitor) or the other (a gratuitous licensee) is not material here. No question is made that she was passing along the driveway for the purpose of entering the McNalley apartment in response to Mrs. McNalley's invitation at the time she fell into the coal hole. She was, therefore, rightfully and lawfully in the driveway using it for a purpose for which it was maintained by the defendants, and for which they must be taken to have expected it would be used.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"It is well settled that if a landlord while renting premises retains portions thereof under his control, as was done in the case at bar, the responsibility for injuries to persons rightfully there is his and not the tenant's. He is liable not in his character as lessor but as owner and occupant. He owes a duty to his tenants and those on the premises at their invitation for any lawful purpose to keep such undemised parts reasonably safe."”
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.