Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 165 Ga. App. 847 - Wren v. Harrison

165 Ga. App. 847 - Wren v. Harrison’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
2
states following
March 2009
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently March 2009

22 state decisions

140198319902000decided

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 157 Ga. App. 436 - Holiday Inns, Inc. v. Newton · 159 Ga. App. 906 - Truelove v. Wilson · 118 Ga. App. 326 - Patterson v. Thomas · London Iron & Metal Co. v. Abney · Gregory v. Johnson

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

  1. “While the majority may correctly survey the historical duty of care imposed upon a landowner as to a licensee, I believe it ignores the recent trend of the law to date culminating in Gregory v. Johnson, 249 Ga. 151 ( 289 SE2d 232 ) (1982) overruling Gregory v. Johnson, 159 Ga.App. 320 ( 283 SE2d 357 ) (1981). My personal observations in the special concurrence therein did not prevail. The Supreme Court in Gregory followed Section 339 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts and imposed a duty on the landowner to exercise reasonable care to prevent foreseeable injury to trespassing children. Questions of any breach of that duty and any contributory negli gence of the parents were designated for jury resolution. The anomalous effect of the majority’s decision here is to impose a lesser duty of care as to a social guest/licensee than the duty owed to a mere trespasser. “While section 339 is phrased in terms of trespassing children, it is not limited to them. The same principles apply if the child is a licensee or invitee. It would be irrational to impose a higher duty on landowners when the child is a trespasser than when he is a licensee or invitee. Section 343B of the Restatement states that, ‘(i)n any case where a possessor of land would be subject to liability to a child for physical harm caused by a condition on the land if the child were a trespasser, the possessor is subject to liability if the child is a licensee or an invitee.’ While there may be a greater duty owed to lice”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “A possessor of land is subject to liability for physical harm to children trespassing thereon caused by an artificial condition upon the land if (a) the place where the condition exists is one upon which the possessor knows or has reason to know that children are likely to trespass, and (b) the condition is one of which the possessor knows or has reason to know and which he realizes or should realize will involve an unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily harm to such children, and (c) the children because of their youth do not discover the condition or realize the risk involved in intermeddling with it or in coming within the area made dangerous by it, and (d) the utility to the possessor of maintaining the condition and the burden of eliminating the danger are slight as compared with the risk to the children involved, and (e) the possessor fails to exercise reasonable care to eliminate the danger or otherwise to protect the children.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “An owner [or occupier] owes to a licensee no duty as to the condition of the premises save that he should not knowingly let him run upon a hidden peril or wilfully cause him harm. This is the obligation not to lay for him or permit to exist pitfalls or mantraps in which it may be reasonably anticipated he will become ensnared.”
    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.