Cesario v. Chiapparine’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 1996
2 federal appellate · 1 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 Taylor v. New Jersey Highway Authority · Herman v. . Roberts · Hilsenbeck v. . Guhring · Nelson v. Nygren · Appel v. Muller
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We reach this conclusion because we see no reason not to invoke the rule which renders an abutting owner responsible for damages when, by artificial means, water is diverted to a public sidewalk where it freezes. That rule must be applied to an owner creating the same condition by the same means on an alleyway which is subject to an easement in favor of an abutting owner.” Cesario, 250 N.Y.S.2d at 590 . Therefore, any duty which Cesario can be read to impose on a servient owner stems from the special rules relating to water diversion. 2 . SZS’s interpretation of the word”
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.