Kellermann v. McDonough’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
57
cited by 57 later decisions
2
states following
January 2023
most recently cited
2 district · 33 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Glanzer v. . Shepard · Fox v. Custis · 18 Cal. 4th 604 - Artiglio v. Corning Inc. · Delk v. Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp. · Yuzefovsky v. St. John's Wood Apartments
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“One who undertakes, gratuitously or for consideration, to render services to another which he should recognize as necessary for the protection of a third person or his things, is subject to liability to the third person for physical harm resulting from his failure to exercise reasonable care to protect his undertaking, if (a) his failure to exercise reasonable care increases the risk of such harm, or (b) he has undertaken to perform a duty owed by the other to the third person, or (c) the harm is suffered because of reliance of the other or the third person upon the undertaking.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“The issue whether a legal duty in tort exists is a pure question of law.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“However, this general rule does not apply when a special relationship exists between a defendant and a plaintiff that gives rise to a right to protection to the plaintiff or between the defendant and third persons that imposes a duty upon the defendant to control the conduct of the third person causing reasonably foreseeable danger to the plaintiff.... Examples of special relationships that we have recognized between a defendant and a plaintiff include common carrier-passenger, business proprietor-invitee, innkeeper-guest, and employer-employee with regard to the employer’s potential duty of protecting or warning an employee.”
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.