Ellerbe v. Otis Elevator Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably Zapata v. Burns (1988), Whiting-Turner Contracting Co. v. Coupard (1985)
18 federal appellate · 35 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Silver v. Silver · Rosenberg v. Town of North Bergen · Freezer Storage, Inc. v. Armstrong Cork Co. · City of Dallas v. Trammell · Howell Ex Rel. Howell v. Burk
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Article 5536a ... was amended by adding section 2 extending the protection of the Act to “any person” performing or furnishing construction or repair of any improvements on real property.... An elevator in a multi-storied building obviously constitutes an improvement on real property. The manufacturer of the elevator would be a person performing or furnishing construction of the elevator even though it did not install it in the building. ... Section 2 of Article 5536a is a sufficient basis for the summary judgment in favor of Otis Elevator Company.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Sec. 2. There shall be commenced and prosecuted within ten years after the substantial completion of any improvement to real property, and not afterward, all actions or suits in court for damages for any injury, damages, or loss to property, real or personal, or for any injury to a person, or for wrongful death, or for contribution or indemnity for damages sustained on account of such injury, damage, loss or death arising out of the defective or unsafe condition of any such real property or any deficiency in the construction or repair of any improvements on such real property against any person performing or furnishing construction or repair of any such improvement;...”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“§ 16.008. Architects and Engineers Furnishing Design, Planning, or Inspection of Construction of Improvements (a) A person must bring suit for damages for a claim listed in Subsection (b) against a registered or licensed architect or engineer in this state, who designs, plans, or inspects the construction of an improvement to real property or equipment attached to real property, not later than 10 years after the substantial completion of the improvement or the beginning of operation of the equipment in an action arising out of a defective or unsafe condition of the real property, the improvement, or the equipment. (b) This section applies to suit for: (1) injury, damage, or loss to real or personal property; (2) personal injury; (3) wrongful death; (4) contribution; or (5) indemnity. (c) If the claimant presents a written claim for damages, contribution, or indemnity to the architect or engineer within the 10-year limitations period, the period is extended for two years from the day the claim is presented. § 16.009. Persons Furnishing Construction or Repair of Improvements (a)A claimant must bring suit for damages for a claim listed in Subsection (b) against a person who constructs or repairs an improvement to real property not later than 10 years after the substantial completion of the improvement in an action arising out of a defective or unsafe condition of the real property or a deficiency in the construction or repair of the improvement. (b) This section applies to suit ”
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.