Johnson v. Pettigrew’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently May 2012
15 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 Miller v. Griesel · 144 Ind. App. 471 - Wozniczka v. McKEAN · Shuamber v. Henderson · Douglass v. Irvin · L.S. Ayres Company v. Hicks
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“At first, the younger boys continued to burn the debris as directed, but they soon tired of the routine and decided to "mess around" with the fire. The boys took a lighted shop rag on a stick and started another fire out of sight of the tool shed, fueling it with boxes, wood and other debris. Then, with Chuck acting as a lookout to ensure that Jason and Derrick would not see, they filled a plastic jug partially full of gasoline which they obtained from a tank used for farm purposes. The boys then laid the jug on its side near the fire and took turns stomping on it, propelling the gasoline into the fire and causing small explosions. When Jeff took his turn to stomp on the jug, gasoline splattered onto his leg and he caught fire. Though the boys were able to put the fire out, Jeff sustained second and third-degree burns to his legs.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Pfenning v. Lineman“[T] here is a well-recognized duty in tort law that persons entrusted with children have a duty to supervise their charges. The duty is to exercise ordinary care on behalf of the child in eusto-dy. The duty exists whether or not the supervising party has agreed to watch over the child for some form of compensation. However, the caretaker is not an insurer of the safety of the child and has no duty to foresee and guard against every possible hazard.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Pfenning v. Lineman“the Pettigrews, who assumed the supervision of Jeff Johnson, left the three boys in the custody of their employee and their son, who were instructed to change the tires on a truck in addition to watching over the boys as they burned debris.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Pfenning v. Lineman
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.