Abramczyk v. Abbey’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably 177 Conn. App. 83 - McFarline v. Mickens (2017), Colombo v. Stop & Shop Supermarket Co. (2001)
25 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 Mendillo v. Board of Education · Ferreira v. Pringle · Lodge v. Arett Sales Corp. · Gambardella v. Kaoud · Chazen v. City of New Britain
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An abutting landowner can be held liable . . . for injuries resulting from the unsafe condition of a public sidewalk caused by the landowner's positive acts.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The existence of a duty is a question of law and only if such a duty is found to exist does the trier of fact then determine whether the defendant violated that duty in the particular situation at hand.... Because the court's determination of whether the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff is a question of law, our standard of review is plenary.... Our Supreme Court has stated that the test for the existence of a legal duty of care entails (1) a determination of whether an ordinary person in the defendant's position, knowing what the defendant knew or should have known, would anticipate that harm of the general nature of that suffered was likely to result, and (2) a determination, on the basis of a public policy analysis, of whether the defendant's responsibility for its negligent conduct should extend to the particular consequences or particular plaintiff in the case.... The first part of the test invokes the question of foreseeability, and the second part invokes the question of policy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The existence of a duty is a question of law and only if such a duty is found to exist does the trier of fact then determine whether the defendant violated that duty in the particular situation at hand.”
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.