Schrempf v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently June 2012
4 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 Martindale v. State · Scolavino v. State · Curley v. State · Dow v. State · Joachim v. State
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]n certain limited instances, however, the New York Court of Appeals has recognized that a duty can arise where there is a relationship either between defendant and a third person tortfeasor that encompasses defendant’s actual control of the third person’s actions, or between defendant and plaintiff that requires defendant to protect plaintiff from the conduct of others.” (Reply at 14 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).) 3 . Although the defendant in Schrempf was a state entity, the court explained that, “where the State engages in a proprietary function, such as providing medical and psychiatric caret,] ■ • • the State is held to the same duty of care as private individuals and institutions engaging in the same activity.”
1 later decision 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.