Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 13 N.J. 296 - Mazzilli v. Selger

Mazzilli v. Selger’s Empirical Analysis

1953

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
4
states following
January 2021
most recently cited

2 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently January 2021 · most notably Rappaport v. Nichols (1959), Mazzilli v. Acc. & Cas. Ins. Co. of Winterthur (1961)

2 district · 29 state decisions

8019531960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Vadurro v. Yellow Cab Co. of Camden · Larocca v. American Chain and Cable Co. · Wilson v. Savino · Wilson v. Brauer · 23 N.J. Super. 496 - Mazzilli v. Selger

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

  1. “The duty in the present case is to be found in the principle that one has a duty not to permit a third person to `use a thing or engage in an activity which is under the control of the actor, if the actor knows or should know that such person intends or is likely to use the thing or conduct himself in the activity in such a manner as to create an unreasonable risk of harm to others' (emphasis supplied). Restatement of the Law, Torts ( Negligence ) (1934), sec. 308. This rule in substance was applied in Wilson v. Brauer, 97 N.J.L. 482, 484-485 ( E. & A. 1922). Cf. Petry v. Hopping, 97 N.J.L. 418, 421 ( Sup. Ct. 1922); Driesse v. Verblaauw, 9 N.J. Misc. 173 ( Sup. Ct. 1931). Such a duty has been held to exist in connection with the storage or possession of dynamite cartridges in the home of the parents of an infant. Vallency v. Rigillo, 91 N.J.L. 307, 308 ( E. & A. 1917)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “knows or should know of the necessity and opportunity for exercising such control.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “knows or has reason to know that he has the ability to control his child”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.