Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 151 Wis. 2d 45 - Farrell v. John Deere Co.

151 Wis. 2d 45 - Farrell v. John Deere Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
3
states following
October 2021
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently October 2021 · most notably Couch v. Astec Industries, Inc. (2002), 176 Wis. 2d 587 - Glassey v. Continental Insurance (1993)

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

24019891990200020102020decided

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 21 Wis. 2d 182 - Pierringer v. Hoger · 70 Wis. 2d 836 - Antoniewicz v. Reszczynski · 137 Wis. 2d 397 - Ford Motor Co. v. Lyons · 110 Wis. 2d 581 - D.L. Ex Rel. Friederichs v. Huebner · 121 Wis. 2d 338 - Sumnicht v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.

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

  1. “Liability based on enhanced injury has been recognized in Wisconsin cases, .... These include second collision or crashworthiness cases, seat-belt cases, and successive tort-feasors in medical malpractice cases. In all these situations, the successive tort-feasor was alleged to have enhanced or aggravated the plaintiffs injuries, but was not alleged to have caused the initial accident or damage. In these situations, the successive tort-feasor is not jointly liable for all the injuries to the claimant, but only for those injuries caused by the tortious conduct over and above the damage or injury that would have occurred as a result of the accident absent the successor tort-feasor's conduct.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “no reason in logic or law why application of enhanced injury law should be precluded merely because the successive tort-feasor is alleged also to have tortiously caused the initial accident.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “under conditions and circumstances similar to those of the accident which injured the plaintiff.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.