Smith v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

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

1. ““. . . They are, in brief, that, where a person maintains upon his premises anything dangerous to life or limb and of a nature to invite the intrusion of children, he owes them a duty of precaution against harm, and is hable to them for injury from that thing, even though their own act, if not negligent, puts in operation its hurtful agency. One may not bait his premises with some dangerous instrument or quality, alluring to the incautious or vagrant, and then deny responsibility for the consequences of following the natural instincts of curiosity or amusement aroused thereby, without taking reasonable precautions to guard against the accidents hable to ensue. Rights can only be enjoyed subject to those hmitations which regard for the weaknesses and deficiencies of others dictate to be humane and just. This rule has been applied, not only in the ‘turntable cases,’ but to others in which dangerous situations have been negligently maintained, and especially to cases of death or injury by falling into unguarded pools or vats of water.” (Emphasis supplied. )”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Galleher v. City of Wichita