Watts v. Putnam County’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently January 2024 · most notably R.A. Civitello Co. v. City of New Haven (1986), Cronin v. Howe (1995)
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 39 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 Teeters v. Currey · McCroskey v. Bryant Air Conditioning Company · Agus v. Future Chattanooga Development Corporation · Leyen v. Dunn
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““All actions to recover damages for any deficiency in the design, planning, supervision, observation of construction, construction of, or land surveying in connection with, an improvement to real property, for injury to property, real or personal, arising out of any such deficiency, or for injury to the person or for wrongful death arising out of any such deficiency, shall be brought against any person performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, observation of construction, construction of, or land surveying in connection with, such an improvement within four (4) years after substantial completion of such an improvement.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““These statutes (Sec. 28-314 et seq.) are entirely unrelated to the accrual of any cause of action, since they begin to run on the date of substantial completion as opposed to the date of injury or damage.” 525 S.W.2d at 491 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“As we said in Watts : We do not necessarily agree philosophically with the results we reach. We can only construe the statute as it is, not as we think it ought to be. 525 S.W.2d at 494 .”
2 later decisions 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.