Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 172 KY 780 - Stephens v. Stephens

Stephens v. Stephens’s Empirical Analysis

1916

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
4
states following
March 1959
most recently cited

29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently March 1959 · most notably Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Hutton (1927), McGuire v. Almy (1937)

29 state decisions

16019161920193019401950decided

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 Bransom's adm'r v. Labrot · Miller v. Chandler · Neal v. Gillett · O'Brien v. Loomis · Huchting v. Engel

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

  1. ““As a general rule a person leaving exposed and unguarded on his premises an explosive which is found by trespassing children is liable for any injuries resulting from its explosion. This rule is based on the very material and reasonable assumption that children, wherever they go, must be expected to act upon childish instincts and impiilses; and those who are chargeable with a duty of care and caution towards them must calculate upon this, and take precautions accordingly. If persons leave exposed to the observation of children anything which would be tempting to them, and which they in their immature judgment might naturally suppose they were at liberty to handle or play with, such persons should expect that liberty to be taken. ’ ’”
    2 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.