61 Wis. 2d 40 - Gross v. Denow’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably 92 Wis. 2d 17 - Dykstra v. Arthur G. McKee & Co. (1979), 224 Wis. 2d 174 - Peters v. Menard, Inc. (1999)
52 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 Dole v. Dow Chemical Co. · Bielski v. Schulze · Powers v. Allstate Insurance · Kelly v. Long Island Lighting Co. · Walton v. Tull
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[e]very employer and every owner of a place of employment or a public building ... shall so construct, repair or maintain such place of employment or public building as to render the same safe.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““Under this statute an employer has a duty to make the ‘place of employment’ as safe as the nature of the employment will reasonably permit, a higher duty than that of ordinary care. The statute does not make the employer an insurer. The duty set by the statute is not breached merely because the place could be made safer. The employer’s duty to furnish a safe place is an absolute one, but the term ‘safe’ is relative, not absolute. As this court has said, ‘The point is simply that the statute recognizes a “rule of reason.” ’ What is a safe place depends upon the facts and conditions present, and the use to which the place ‘was likely to be put.’ ””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““895.045 Contributory negligence. Contributory negligence shall not bar recovery in an action by any person or his legal representative to recover damages for negligence resulting in death or in injury to person or property, if such negligence was not greater than the negligence of the person against whom recovery is sought, but any damages allowed shall be diminished in the proportion to the amount of negligence attributable to the person recovering.””
3 later decisions 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.