Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 433 SW2D 769 - Weekes v. Kelley

Weekes v. Kelley’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
January 2003
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently January 2003

9 state decisions

4019681970198019902000decided

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 Genell, Inc. v. Flynn · Carlisle v. J. Weingarten, Inc. · City of Greenville v. Pitts · Blossom Oil & Cotton Co. v. Poteet · Bass v. Cummings

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

  1. ““In 65 C.J.S. Negligence § 63(136), pp. 920, 923, it is said that a host is not liable to his social guest for failure to exercise ordinary care. The rule is stated as follows: ‘As a licensee on the host’s premises, the guest generally takes the premises as he finds them, in so far as any alleged defective condition thereof is concerned, and assumes the ordinary risks or dangers incident to the condition of the premises. The host is not required to inspect the premises to discover defects or to maintain the premises in a safe condition for his guest. The guest is expected to take the premises as the host uses them and may not expect that they will be prepared for his reception or that precautions will be taken for his safety in any manner in which the host did not prepare or take precautions for his own safety or the safety of members of his family, or, as sometimes expressed, where one visits the private home of another as a social guest the owner is bound to take the same care of him that the owner takes of himself and other members of his family, and no more. * * * * * * The host is under a duty to refrain from inflicting on the guest willful or wanton injury, and some cases indicate that this is the extent of the host’s duty or deny recovery in the absence of sufficient proof of willfulness or wantonness. In some jurisdictions the host must refrain from gross, as distinguished from ordinary, negligence * * * Although there is some contrary authority, in many jurisdictions”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““It is well settled in this State that if the person injured was on the premises as a licensee, the duty that the proprietor or licensor owed him was not to injure him by willful, wanton or gross negligence.””
    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.