Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 126 N.M. 196 - Enriquez v. Cochran

Enriquez v. Cochran’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
2
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

57 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably Ponder v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance (2000), Torres v. El Paso Electric Co. (1999)

57 state decisions

300199820002010decided

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 5 Cal. 4th 689 - Privette v. Superior Court · Schmitz v. Smentowski · United Nuclear Corp. v. General Atomic Co. · Bartlett v. New Mexico Welding Supply, Inc. · State v. Rowell

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

  1. “The 'unusual' prong of the definition addresses the relative rarity of the activity and the concomitant lack of contact or experience with the activity and its dangers by the general public.... The second prong of the criteria involves evaluation of the probability of harm to be expected from tire activity.... [T]he risk of harm need not be certain, as could be said of ultrahazardous activities. But, there must be a high risk or probability of harm to participants or passersby in the absence of reasonable precautions. Quantification of the degree of risk or relative probabilities of suffering harm is impossible in the abstract. It can only be done on a case-by-case basis with due regard for the severity of potential harm.”
    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.