Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 184 VA 943 - Alpaugh v. Wolverton

Alpaugh v. Wolverton’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2018 · most notably Lombard v. State of Louisiana (1963), Taboada v. Daly Seven, Inc. (2006)

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 24 state decisions

22019461950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Shorter v. Shelton · Hancock v. . Rand · Davidson v. Chinese Republic Restaurant Co. · Noble v. Higgins · Noble v. Higgins

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

  1. “[e]very one patronizing or seeking to patronize the facilities of a hotel or inn does not necessarily become a ‘guest’ of the establishment within the technical meaning of that term.... • No one would seriously contend that a casual patron- of a barbershop located in a hotel, or one who purchases a newspaper or cigar from a hotel newsstand, or one who uses the pay telephone in the hotel lobby, by virtue of such patronage alone, thereby became a ‘guest’ of the hotel in a technical sense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[W]here a hotel operator operates a restaurant for the accommodation both of its guests and of the public in general, he may be an innkeeper as to some of his patrons and a restaurateur as to others.... [T]he controlling factor in determining whether the relationship of innkeeper and guest has been established is the intent of the parties.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he controlling factor in determining whether the relationship of innkeeper and guest has been established is the intent of the parties.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.