Fisher v. Robbins’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
4 district · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently September 2019 · most notably McFarlin v. Hall (1980), Brittain v. Booth (1979)
4 district · 40 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 Pennsylvania Co v. Chamberlain · National Shawmut Bank v. Joy · 10 Ill. App. 2d 494 - Day v. Barber-Colman Co. · Lappin v. Prebe · Rawson v. Massachusetts Operating Co. 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e do not consider it is a reasonable inference that when people become angry and argue violently with each other that such disagreement portends they will break bottles over each other’s heads or otherwise resort to unlawful assaults and batteries. A mere battle of words, no matter how violent, unaccompanied by action, threat of action or some type of demonstration which gives warning that violence is impending, usually causes no concern of those present, any more than it seemed to have alarmed the plaintiff.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) a disturbance occurred which either did or should have attracted the defendant's attention; (2) defendant had opportunity to act; (3) defendant permitted the disturbance to continue without reasonable effort to quell the same; (4) defendant failed to give plaintiff reasonable protection; (5) there was some relationship between the disturbance and the subsequent violence; and (6) plaintiff was injured as a result of the violence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We do not intend that anything which we have said should be considered as placing us in disagreement with the many well-considered statements from reputable authorities as to the high degree of care which must be exercised by those maintaining places for public patronage, and especially for that class of establishments where experience has shown disturbances of more or less violent character are more likely to occur. This is, of course, particularly true with respect to barrooms and other similar places where intoxicating liquors are consumed, for it is common knowledge that the use of intoxicants frequently unduly excites the tempers, emotions and actions of those who indulge in them.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dubray v. Howshar
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.