Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 149 Colo. 489 - Collins v. Otto

Collins v. Otto’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
6
states following
April 2013
most recently cited

2 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently April 2013

2 district · 17 state decisions

80196219701980199020002010decided

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.

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

  1. ““To some courts, the test to determine the nature of the owner’s responsibility for injuries caused by an animal, that is, whether they are ferae naturae or domitae naturae, has seemed illogical and artificial, and they have preferred to determine such liability, not so much by their classification into wild and domestic, as by their natural propensity for mischief. Much of the authority in support of the rule of absolute liability for injuries by wild animals based upon possession alone is mere dictum, and the doctrine has been squarely repudiated by some courts. According to these courts, the gist of an action against the owner or keeper of a wild animal for injuries inflicted by it is negligence in the manner- or place of keeping the animal — that is, negligence in failing properly to restrain the animal or keep it securely. Under-this view, while any person has an undoubted right to keep-a wild animal, and no one has a right to interfere with him in so doing, lie may be held liable for resulting injuries if be has not exercised reasonable and proper care in tbe particular circumstances, considering the nature and tendencies of the particular animal, in restraining or securing it.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “one who harbors a wild animal, which by its very nature is vicious and unpredictable, does so at his peril, and liability for injuries inflicted by such animal is absolute.”
    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.