141 N.C. App. 1 - Williamson v. Liptzin’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2 district · 31 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co. · 17 Cal. 3d 425 - Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California · Sutton v. Duke · 138 N.C. App. 19 - Poor v. Hill · Hairston v. Alexander Tank & Equipment Co.
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.
“a cause which in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any new and independent cause, produced the plaintiff's injuries, and without which the injuries would not have occurred, and one from which a person of ordinary prudence could have reasonably foreseen that such a result, or consequences of a generally injurious nature, was probable under all the facts as they existed.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“All that the plaintiff is required to prove on the question of for-seeability, in determining proximate cause, is that in the exercise of reasonable care, the defendant might have foreseen that some injury would result from his act or omission, or that consequences of a generally injurious nature might have been expected.”
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.