Fontaine v. Devonis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 state decisions

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

1. ““It is clear that in those cases where the occasion has arisen for a discussion of the limits of the doctrine the court has held it applicable only where the evidence disclosed that the plaintiff had negligently placed himself [or herself] or his [or her] property in a position of peril; that defen dant thereafter had become aware or in the exercise of due care ought to have become aware of plaintiffs peril and his [or her] lack of comprehension of it or apparent inability to extricate himself [or herself] from it; that the defendant if he [or she] had been in the exercise of due care had a reasonable opportunity thereafter to avoid injuring the plaintiff; and that defendant failed to exercise such care.” Fontaine v. Devonis, 114 R.I. 541, 548-49 , 336 A.2d 847, 853 (1975) (quoting Piacitelli v. Saldin, 94 R.I. 367, 373-74 , 180 A.2d 821, 825 (1962)).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Frias v. Jurczyk