Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 263 N.C. 336 - Clark v. Roberts

Clark v. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

72
cited by 72 later decisions
1
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 63 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Collingwood v. GEN. ELEC. R. EST. EQUIT. (1989), Smith v. Fiber Controls Corp. (1980)

8 federal appellate · 63 state decisions

300196519701980199020002010decided

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 Chaffin v. Brame · Kientz v. Carlton · Lincoln v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad · Ramey v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY · Baker v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad

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

  1. “Every person having the capacity to exercise ordinary care for his own safety against injury is required by law to do so, and if he fails to exercise such care, and such failure, concurring and cooperating with the actionable negligence of defendant contributes to the injury complained of, he is guilty of contributory negligence. Ordinary care is such care as an ordinarily prudent person would exercise under the same or similar circumstances to avoid injury.”
    18 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “‘“[I]t is conceded to be the duty of an employer to warn his employees concerning dangers which are known to him, or which in the exercise of reasonable care should be known to him, and are unknown to his employees or are undiscoverable by them in the exercise of due care, and concerning dangers which, by reason of youth, inexperience or incompetency the employees do not appreciate. 9 99”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.