Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 281 Ark. 106 - Hurst v. Feild

Hurst v. Feild’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
October 2020
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably Franklin v. Osca, Inc. (1992), Culpepper v. Smith (1990)

28 state decisions

10019831990200020102020decided

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 Purser v. Corpus Christi State National Bank · Collison v. Curtner · Robinson v. Rebsamen Ford, Inc. · EE Terry, Inc. v. Cities of Helena and West Helena

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

  1. “At common law the lessor owed no duty of repair of the premises to the lessee. Arkansas law follows this rule. Unless a landlord agrees with his tenant to repair the leased premises, he cannot, in the absence of statute, be held liable for repairs. Terry v. Cities of Helena & W. Helena, 256 Ark. 226 , 506 S.W.2d 573 (1974); Collison v. Curtner, 141 Ark. 122 , 216 S.W 1059 (1919). In the instant case, the lease agreements made between the owners and Texaco, Inc. and between Texaco, Inc. and Coleman are not applicable to the lease between Coleman and Hurst because of a lack of privity. Therefore, the only question is whether the terms of the oral sublease from Coleman to Hurst imposed upon Coleman a duty to repair. Appellant Hurst’s affidavit was that Coleman agreed to make repairs and that Coleman told Hurst to call him if any repairs were needed. This is sufficient to raise a question of fact. (Emphasis added.)”
    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.