Barrett v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
6 district · 23 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Gemstar Ltd. v. Ernst & Young · Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of America, Inc. · Standard Chartered PLC v. Price Waterhouse · McFarlin v. Hall · Thompson v. Better-Bilt Aluminum Products 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“intervening force was unforeseeable and may be described, with the benefit of hindsight, as extraordinary.” Id. 7 . Apportionment of fault is not called for when a plaintiff suffers separate injuries and liability can be apportioned based only on causation. See A.R.S. § 12-2506(B). (requiring calculation of percentage of fault only for those who”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A plaintiff proves proximate cause, also referred to as legal cause, by demonstrating a natural and continuous sequence of events stemming from the defendant’s act or omission, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, that produces an injury, in whole or in part, and without which the injury would not have occurred.”
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.