442 F. Supp. 2d 543 - Workman v. Dinkins’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · 136 Ill. 2d 132 - Ward v. K Mart Corp. · 5 Ill. 2d 614 - Kahn v. James Burton Co. · 64 Ill. 2d 380 - Davis v. Marathon 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It was plaintiff's [the mother's] responsibility to make sure that [her daughter] did not gain access to the pool, and she could have done so by positioning herself in an area from which she could have seen [the girl] play in the sand [near the pool], or by latching the pool gate ... [I]t was not reasonably foreseeable that plaintiff would fail to supervise her daughter adequately, and it is more desirable to place the substantial burden of supervising plaintiff's daughter upon plaintiff rather than the homeowners”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Taylor v. Trimble
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.