310 Pa. Super. 433 - Carrender v. Fitterer’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
16 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 290 Pa. Super. 15 - Dawejko v. Jorgensen Steel Co. · Atkins v. Urban Redevelopment Authority · McCay v. Philadelphia Electric Co. · Ferraro v. Ford Motor Co. · Anita Pritchard, Administratrix of the Estate of Otto E. Pritchard, Deceased v. Liggett & Myers Tobacco Company, a Corporation
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1. Type 1 — Express assumption of the risk-where the plaintiff has given his express consent to relieve the defendant of an obligation to exercise care for the plaintiffs protection. 2. Type 2 — Implied assumption of the riskwhére the plaintiff has entered into some relation with the defendant which the plaintiff knows to involve the risk and is, thus, regarded as having impliedly relieved the defendant of a duty to protect plaintiff against the risk. 3. Type 3 — Implied assumption of the risk-where the plaintiff is aware of a risk created by the defendant and proceeds or continues voluntarily to encounter it and the plaintiffs conduct in so doing is entirely reasonable in that the risk is small and/or the plaintiff proceeds with all due caution. 4. Type 4 — Implied assumption of the risk-where the plaintiff voluntarily encounters a known risk created by the defendants conduct but the plaintiff acts unreasonably in doing so and, therefore, is contribytorily negligent.”
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.