Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 258 MINN 502 - Johnson v. O'BRIEN

Johnson v. O'BRIEN’s Empirical Analysis

1960

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
8
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 51 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Cummings v. Prater (1963), Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Company v. Dallas D. Speth and Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation (1968)

4 federal appellate · 51 state decisions

140196019701980199020002010decided

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 Breimhorst v. Beckman · McCourtie v. United States Steel Corp. · Tvedt v. Wheeler · Amsinger v. Najim · Kayser v. Lindell

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

  1. “[W]here a landlord has information which would lead a reasonably prudent owner exercising due care to suspect that danger exists on the leased premises at the time the tenant takes possession, and that the tenant exercising due care would not discover it for himself, then he must at least disclose such information to the tenant.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Defendants also raise as an issue the admissibility of evidence regarding property transfers made by the defendants to their children shortly after this injury occurred; also the comment made by the court as to what the jury could consider regarding this evidence. As near as can be determined, with the exception of one authority, it is uniformly held that evidence of one’s property transfers after the occurrence of some event which may render him liable in damages is admissible to show a consciousness of liability and a pur pose to evade satisfaction of it. 20 Am.Jur., Evidence, § 279; 2 Wigmore, Evidence (3 ed.) § 282; Annotations, 80 A.L.R. 1139 and 65 A.L.R. 1307 ; Klein v. Pasch, 153 Minn. 291 , 190 N.W. 338 .””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““ * * * the liability of a landlord ‘is not restricted to those instances where the lessor has actual knowledge of the dangerous condition of the premises, but includes those cases where he has information which would lead an ordinarily reasonable man to suspect that danger exists,’ * * * ‘The liability for concealing or failing to disclose a dangerous condition unknown to the lessee is based on the theory of negligence.’ ” (Emphasis added) * * * “We agree with the trial court that ‘To require one to use that care which an ordinarily prudent person would exercise under the same or similar circumstances can hardly be onerous, unreasonable or oppressive.’ ””
    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.