28 Va. App. 401 - Roberts v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
April 2017
most recently cited
16 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Prillaman v. Commonwealth · Furman v. Call · 24 Va. App. 734 - Flinchum v. Commonwealth · Kay Management Co., Inc. v. Creason · Kay Management Co., Inc. v. Creason
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he 7-Eleven parking lot was privately owned property. The owner of the lot. . . issued an invitation to do business to the public. Access by the public to the property was restricted to this invitation. The owner and its employees retained the right to ask persons to leave the property and to have trespassers removed by the police. No traffic signs existed on the parking lot. Based upon the restricted public access to the premises, the parking lot of the 7-Eleven store was not a “highway” as defined by Code § 46.2-100.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“signs that indicated that access to the area was restricted in any way”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kim v. Commonwealth“such persons were sometimes charged with trespassing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kim v. Commonwealth
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.