Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 3 CONNAPP 16 - Todd v. Malafronte

Todd v. Malafronte’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
5
states following
June 2012
most recently cited

6 district · 55 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably Haynes v. Yale-New Haven Hospital (1997), Hallas v. Boehmke & Dobosz, Inc. (1997)

6 district · 55 state decisions

3501984199020002010decided

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 Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc. · Puro v. Henry · Warner v. Leslie-Elliott Constructors, Inc. · Frankovitch v. Burton · Muha v. United Oil Co.

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

  1. “In the ordinary action for negligence the jury can apply, unaided by experts, the standard of care of the reasonably prudent person under the circumstances. Levett v. Etkind, 158 Conn. 567 , 573 , 265 A.2d 70 (1969). This standard does not apply to an action where laymen cannot be expected to know the requirements of proper care in the usual case. Id., 573-74 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Where he undertakes to procure a policy affording protection CT Page 9282 against a designated risk, the law imposes upon him an obligation to perform with reasonable care the duty he has assumed, and he may be liable for loss properly attributable to his default.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “conclusion of negligence is ordinarily one of mixed law and fact, involving the determination of the standard of care required and its application to the facts of the particular case”
    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.