Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 157 CONN 216 - Warren v. Stancliff

Warren v. Stancliff’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
1
states following
September 2010
most recently cited

2 district · 53 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently September 2010 · most notably Hall v. Burns (1990), Fleming v. Garnett (1994)

2 district · 53 state decisions

250196819701980199020002010decided

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 State v. Tillman · Morris v. King Cole Stores, Inc. · Monahan v. Montgomery · Marley v. New England Transportation Co. · Petty v. Cranston Print Works Company

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

  1. “[t]he possessor of land has no duty to warn an invitee of a dangerous condition when the invitee has actual knowledge of the condition.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Constructive notice is premised on the policy determination that under certain circumstances a person should be treated as if he had actual knowledge so that one should not be permitted to deny knowledge when he is acting so as to keep himself ignorant. . . . Therefore, when a possessor of land fails to make or to have made a reasonable inspection which would have disclosed the dangerous condition, his negligent ignorance is, in the eyes of the law, equivalent to actual knowledge. . . .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “when a possessor of land fails to make or to have made a reasonable inspection which would have disclosed [a] dangerous condition, his negligent ignorance is, in the eyes of the law, equivalent to [having] actual knowledge of that condition.”
    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.