Schultz v. Eslick’s Empirical Analysis
788 F.2d 558 · 1986
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Markowitz v. Arizona Parks Board · Coburn v. City of Tucson · Cummings v. Prater · 18 Ariz. App. 176 - Presson v. Mountain States Properties, Inc. · Vigue v. Noyes
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No Arizona decision appears to have decided whether an unfenced residential pool is unreasonably dangerous to a three-year-old child as a matter of law. We believe that the liability question should be sent to an Arizona jury because reasonable minds could differ on whether the unfenced pool was unreasonably dangerous to small children.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The open and obvious condition is merely a factor to be taken into consideration in determining whether the condition was unreasonably dangerous.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Udy v. Calvary Corp.
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.