Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 188 Kan. 413 - Hughes v. Atkinson

Hughes v. Atkinson’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently June 2015

14 state decisions

60196119701980199020002010decided

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 Sams v. Commercial Standard Insurance · A. C. Ferrellgas Corp. v. Phoenix Insurance · Blakeman v. Lofland · Casner v. Common School District No. 7 · Lips v. Opp

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

  1. ““ ‘In the absence of special agreement, an agistor is bound to exercise ordinary diligence in keeping, feeding, sheltering, and otherwise caring for animals committed to his custody, and is liable for loss or injury to the animals resulting from his breach of such duty; exercise of ordinary care satisfies the agistor’s obligations, he is not an insurer; and he may not be held responsible for loss or damage occurring without his fault.’ ” Hughes v. Atkinson, 188 Kan. 413, 421 , 362 P.2d 618 (1961) (quoting 3 C.J.S., Animals § 17, pp. 1108-09).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““In approaching these questions it should be pointed out that in reviewing such claims the rule of general construction is that instructions must be construed together and if taken as a whole they properly state the law they are sufficient. (Giltner v. Stephens, 166 Kan. 172 , 200 P. 2d 290 ; Wing v. Mid-Continent Seeds, 170 Kan. 242, 246 , 225 P. 78 ; Casner v. Common School District No. 7, 175 Kan. 551, 556 , 265 P. 2d 1027 .)””
    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.