Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 213 CONN 446 - Hall v. Burns

Hall v. Burns’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

185
cited by 185 later decisions
1
states following
December 2019
most recently cited

182 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 185 later decisions — most recently December 2019 · most notably Williams Ford, Inc. v. Hartford Courant Co. (1995), 30 Conn. App. 305 - Gulack v. Gulack (1993)

182 state decisions

1310199020002010decided

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 United Families of America v. Kendrick · United Families of America v. Kendrick · Secondino v. New Haven Gas Co. · Finley v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co. · White v. Burns

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

  1. “'A cause of action is that single group of facts which is claimed to have brought about an unlawful injury to the plaintiff and which entitles the plaintiff to relief' . . . `A right of action at law arises from the existence of a primary right in the plaintiff, and an invasion of that right by some delict on the part of the defendant. The facts which establish the existence of that right and that delict constitute the cause of action.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A possessor of land is charged with constructive notice of a dangerous condition when . . . a reasonable inspection would have disclosed the risk. . . . Constructive notice is premised on the policy determination that under certain circumstances a person should be treated as if he had actual knowledge. . . .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[a]ny object in, upon, or near the traveled path, which would necessarily obstruct or hinder one in the use of the road for the purpose of traveling thereon, or which, from its nature and position, would be likely to produce that result . . . .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.