Smit v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
1 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently November 2024
1 district · 9 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 Moses v. Diocese of Colorado · University of Denver v. Whitlock · Taco Bell, Inc. v. Lannon · Perreira v. State · Jardel Enterprises, Inc. v. Triconsultants, Inc.
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.
“the law distinguishes between acting and failure to act, that is, misfeasance, which is active misconduct that injures others, and nonfeasance, which is a failure to take positive steps to protect others from harm.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“No one factor is controlling, and the question of whether a duty should be imposed in a particular case is essentially one of fairness under contemporary standards-whether reasonable persons would recognize a duty and agree that it exists.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[I]n nonfeasance cases, the [party asserting negligence] has the added burden of establishing that a special relationship exists between the parties such that social policy justifies the imposition of a duty to act.”
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.