79 Md. App. 20 - Wright v. Neale’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
August 2004
most recently cited
4 district · 8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on McCart v. Muir · Krum v. Malloy · Rounds, Admr. v. Phillips · Kahlenberg v. Goldstein · Mettelka v. Superior Court
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘One who supplies directly or through a third person a chattel for the use of another whom the supplier knows, or from facts known to him should know, to be likely because of his youth, inexperience or otherwise, to use it in a manner involving unreasonable risk of bodily harm to himself and others whom the supplier should expect to share in, or be in the vicinity of its use, is subject to liability for bodily harm caused thereby to them.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Neale v. Wright · Mackey v. Dorsey“(1) The making available to another a chattel which the supplier (2) knows or should have known the user is likely to use in a manner involving risk of physical harm to others (3) the supplier should expect to be endangered by its use.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mackey v. Dorsey
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.