Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 133 Colo. 458 - Webb v. Thomas

Webb v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

1956

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
3
states following
November 2004
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently November 2004

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 14 state decisions

80195619601970198019902000decided

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 Englehardt v. Philipps · Yaniger v. Calvert Bldg. & Construction Co. · Glaze v. Benson · Perkins v. Byrnes · Shideler v. Habiger

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

  1. ““It is to be noted that the comparative knowledge of the parties is the test of liability — that is to say, the knowledge of the defendant as opposed to the knowledge of the person injured. Two conditions must concur, if the possessor of the land is to be held liable: (1) a realization that the condition constitutes an unreasonable risk to the patron; and (2) the absence of reason to believe that the condition will be discovered by the patron or the risk realized by him. * * * ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““While the proprietor of premises is not an insurer, nevertheless it is his duty to use reasonable care and be diligent in furnishing and maintaining the premises in a reasonably safe condition for the purpose for which it is designed and to which it is adapted.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[wals not chargeable with negligence for failure to foresee a possible injury rather than a probable one”
    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.