Yeh v. Arnold’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently October 2015
3 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 Robinson v. Kroger 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[The duty] to exercise diligence in making the premises safe[ ] includfes] a duty to inspect the premises to discover possibly dangerous conditions. Robinson at 740 . The record contains no evidence as to any exercise of diligence on the part of defendant or explanation as to why the defective [paint] could not have been discovered and remedied. . . . Consequently, whether defendant had constructive knowledge of this hazard is an issue for determination by a jury.”
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.