Elder v. Orluck’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably Nelson v. Concrete Supply Company (1991), Shields, Arnett L. v. Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation (1987)
2 federal appellate · 49 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 Commonwealth v. Driscoll · McCay v. Philadelphia Electric Co. · 95 Wis. 2d 461 - Reiter v. Dyken · 96 Wis. 2d 314 - Wisconsin Natural Gas Co. v. Ford, Bacon & Davis Construction Corp. · Hack v. Hack
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“§ 7102. Comparative negligence (a) General rule. — In all actions brought to recover damages for negligence resulting in death or injury to person or property, the fact that the plaintiff may have been guilty of contributory negligence shall not bar a recovery by the plaintiff or his legal representative ■where such negligence was not greater than the causal negligence of the defendant or defendants against whom recovery is sought, but any damages sustained by the plaintiff shall be diminished in proportion to the amount of negligence attributed to the plaintiff. (b) Recovery against joint defendant; contribution.. — Where recovery is allowed against more than one defendant, each defendant shall be liable for that proportion of the total dollar amount awarded as damages in the ratio of the amount of his causal negligence to the amount of causal negligence attributed to all defendants against whom recovery is allowed. The plaintiff may recover the full amount of the allowed recovery from any defendant against whom the plaintiff is not barred from recovery. Any defendant who is so compelled to pay more than his percentage share may seek contribution.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Any unfairness that results when a tort.feasor cannot be made to pay his proportionate share of the damages is a product of the joint and several liability doctrine. It does not result from applying the “combined comparison” [unit] rule.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the loss has traditionally fallen on the wrongdoer.”
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.