Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 147 W. Va. 313 - Burdette v. Burdette

147 W. Va. 313 - Burdette v. Burdette’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
1
states following
November 2013
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently November 2013 · most notably 151 W. Va. 158 - Morgan v. Price (1966), 165 W. Va. 689 - Hovermale v. Berkeley Springs Moose Lodge No. 1483 (1980)

7 federal appellate · 37 state decisions

240196219701980199020002010decided

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 138 W. Va. 639 - Matthews v. Cumberland & Allegheny Gas Co. · 129 W. Va. 267 - Divita v. Atlantic Trucking Co. · 140 W. Va. 327 - Puffer v. Hub Cigar Store, Inc. · 135 W. Va. 341 - Webb v. Sessler · Hartley v. Crede

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

  1. ““The owner or the occupant of premises owes to an invited person the duty to exercise ordinary care to keep and maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition.” Point 2 Syllabus, Burdette v. Burdette, 147 W.Va. 313 [ 127 S.E.2d 249 ].”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The duty to keep premises safe for invitees applies only to defects or conditions which are in the nature of hidden dangers, traps, snares, pitfalls, and the like, in that they are not known to the invitee, and would not be observed by him in the exercise of ordinary care. The invitee assumes all normal, obvious, or ordinary risks attendant on the use of the premises, and the owner or occupant is under no duty to reconstruct or alter the premises so as to obviate known and obvious dangers.... There is no liability for injuries from dangers that are obvious, reasonably apparent, or as well known to the person injured as they are to the owner or occupant.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““A person is an invitee when for purposes connected with the business conducted on the premises he enters or uses a place of business.” Point 1 Syllabus, Burdette v. Burdette, 147 W.Va. 313 [ 127 S.E.2d 249 ],”
    3 later decisions 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.