Lemon v. Busey’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
4 district · 25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently July 2006 · most notably Bowers v. Ottenad (1986), Duckers v. Lynch (1970)
4 district · 25 state decisions
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 Kermarec v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique · United Zinc & Chemical Co. v. Britt · Clark v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours Powder Co. · Davis v. Central Congregational Society of Jamaica Plain · Graham v. Loper Electric Co.
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) An invitee is either a public invitee or a business visitor.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The fact that someone is invited to visit does not make him a public invitee. The purpose of his visit determines his status. . . .” (p. 123.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The basis of liability in this case was not some claimed defect or obstacle in or on the church premises, but was the overt act of the defendants, and particularly the elevator company, in leaving the door on the fifth floor leading to the church roof unlocked so as to afford the little girl access to the roof of the church from which she fell. “Under the rule announced in Montague v. Burgerhoff, 150 Kan. 217 , 92 P.2d 98 , affirmed in Morris v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Rly. Co., 198 Kan. 147 , 422 P.2d 920 , the plaintiff was entitled to present his case to a jury. The negligence which was conceded by both defendants, was not passive negligence — negligence which causes dangers arising from the physical condition of the premises — but was active negligence in the managment of the church property- — -leaving the door unlocked — which resulted in the little gird being subjected to increased hazards and danger. Active negligence as applied in Montague is conduct which represents an increased hazard or danger to the licensee, or may be deemed an overt act of negligence. See James, Tort Liability of Occupiers of Land: Duties owed to Licensees and Invitees, 63 Yale L.J. 605 .” p. 128.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Bowers v. Ottenad
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.