Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1998 OK 80 - Weldon v. Dunn

Weldon v. Dunn’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
April 2023
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently April 2023

12 state decisions

601998200020102020decided

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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Salve Regina College v. Russell · Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc.

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

  1. “does have a duty to exercise ordinary care to prevent injury to another whenever the circumstances are such that the owner, as an ordinary prudent person, could reasonably foresee that another will be in danger of injury as a probable consequence of the owner's actions .”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “which are so apparent or readily observable that one would reasonably expect them to be discovered.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The court should render summary judgment when there is no substantial controversy as to any material fact, and one of the parties is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court must also find that reasonable people could not reach different conclusions on the undisputed facts. All inferences to be drawn from the undisputed facts must be viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. Nevertheless, the mere contention that facts exist, or might exist, to create a fact question is insufficient. (Citation omitted.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.