Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 239 SO2D 22 - Johnson v. Hatoum

Johnson v. Hatoum’s Empirical Analysis

1970

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
7
states following
March 2015
most recently cited

1 district · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently March 2015

1 district · 15 state decisions

6019701980199020002010decided

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 Gory Roofing Tile Manufacturing, Inc. v. Davison · Pinkerton-Hays Lumber Company v. Pope · Cone v. Inter County Telephone Telegraph Co. · St. Johns County v. Murphy · 128 So. 2d 901 - Schatz v. 7-Eleven, Inc.

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

  1. “"We are not unmindful of the obvious fact that at times operators lose control over the forward progress and direction of their vehicles either through negligence or as a result of defective mechanisms, which sometimes result in damage or injury to others. In a sense all such occurrences are foreseeable. They are not, however, incidents to ordinary operation of vehicles, and do not happen in the ordinary and normal course of events. When they happen, the consequences resulting therefrom are matters of chance and speculation. If as a matter of law such occurrences are held to be foreseeable and therefore to be guarded against, there would be no limitation on the duty owed by owners of establishments into which people are invited to enter. Such occurrences fall within the category of the unusual or extraordinary, and are therefore unforeseeable in contemplation of the law."”
    2 later decisions 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.