Bream v. Berger’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently July 1999 · most notably O'Neill v. United States (1969), Allison v. Snelling & Snelling, Inc. (1967)
3 federal appellate · 21 state decisions
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 Bailey v. Alexander Realty Co. · McCreery v. Westmoreland Farm Bureau Co-Operative Ass'n · Rogers v. Max Azen, Inc. · Johnson v. RULON · Bartek v. Grossman
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘ “No person is required to take extraordinary precautions to save adults in apparent possession of their reasoning faculties from the consequences of their own inattentiveness and carelessness. * * * 'Everyone has a right to proceed upon the assumption that those to whom he owes a duty of care are normal in every respect and prepared on their part to exercise the care of prudent persons generally’”. Jefferson v. Y.M.C.A., 354 Pa. 563, 567 , 47 A.2d 653, 655 . * * * * # ¡K ‘ “What this court stated in Bailey v. Alexander Realty Co., 342 Pa. 362 , 20 A.2d 754, 756 , applies to the instant case: * * * When an individual can assure his own safety by the use of his senses, he must do so or abide the consequences of his carelessness. * * * The duty of availing oneself of one’s senses, for self-protection can seldom be breached with physica[l] impunity and never with legal sanction. * * * ’ ‘ “A person may not recover for injuries which are received as a result of a failure on his part to observe and avoid an obvious condition which ordinary care for his own safety would have disclosed”: Boock v. Acme Markets Inc., 347 Pa. 501, 503 , 32 A.2d 759, 760 ; Rogers v. Max Azen, Inc., 340 Pa. 328 , 16 A.2d 529 .’ The well established rule that a victim cannot recover damages for injuries sustained by him if he could have avoided the injury by the exercise of ordinary care bars this plaintiff’s recovery. This is not the case of a hidden danger, or of a danger that was obscured by another”
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.