Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 713 NE2D 877 - Taylor v. Duke

Taylor v. Duke’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Burrell v. Meads · 35 Wash. App. 324 - Jarr v. Seeco Construction Co. · Witham v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co. · Dunifon v. Iovino · McCormick v. State, Department of Natural Resources

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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “omission or failure to act when the actor has actual knowledge of the natural and probable consequence of injury and has opportunity to avoid that risk,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “so grossly deviant from everyday standards that the licensee or trespasser cannot be expected to anticipate it.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “had knowledge of an impending danger or consciousness of misconduct calculated to result in probable injury,”
    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.