Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 525 F.2d 1328 - Clark v. Circus-Circus, Inc.

Clark v. Circus-Circus, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

525 F.2d 1328 · 1975

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
2
states following
April 1993
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently April 1993

1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

10197519801990decided

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 23 Cal. 2d 288 - Crane v. Smith · 116 Cal. App. 2d 310 - Ellis v. D'Angelo · 51 Cal. 2d 448 - Courtell v. McEachen · 61 Cal. 2d 681 - Fowler v. Seaton · Holbrock v. Hamilton Distributing, Inc.

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

  1. “A child of tender years is not required to conform to the standards of behavior which it is reasonable to expect of an adult. His conduct is to be judged by the standard of behavior to be expected of a child of like age, intelligence, and experience. A child may be so young as to be manifestly and utterly incapable of exercising any of those qualities of attention, perception, knowledge, experience, intelligence, and judgment which are necessary to enable him to perceive a risk and to realize its unreasonable character . . . The prevailing view is that in tort cases no [age] limits can be fixed. Undoubtedly there is a minimum age, probably somewhere in the vicinity of four years, below which negligence can never be found. (Emphasis added.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.