Barrett v. FA Group, LLC’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · 154 Ill. 2d 90 - Outboard Marine Corp. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance · 136 Ill. 2d 132 - Ward v. K Mart Corp. · 213 Ill. 2d 307 - Home Insurance v. Cincinnati Insurance · 408 Ill. App. 3d 564 - Khan v. BDO Seidman, LLP
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Id. ¶ 22. The First District Appellate Court reversed, finding that it was the role of the jury to decide whether the defect was actionable because of the existence of aggravating factors. ¶ 33 The appellate court first noted the importance of the plaintiff's allegations as to the actual cause of her fall. The plaintiff did not argue that the depth of the pothole caused her to trip and fall,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Here, we cannot say, as a matter of law, that it was not reasonably foreseeable that an individual parking his or her vehicle in the parking lot would choose to walk across the lot instead of using an out-of-the way sidewalk.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[i]f a defect is such that a reasonably prudent person would not anticipate some danger to persons walking upon it, it is considered de minimis and is not actionable.”
1 later decision 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.