Duren v. Kunkel’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 state decisions

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

1. “A possessor of a domestic animal that he knows or has reason to know has dangerous propensities abnormal to its class is subject to liability for harm done by the animal to another, although he has exercised the utmost care to prevent it from doing harm. Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 509(1) (1977).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Wilson Ex Rel. Wilson v. Simmons · Mathes by and Through Mathes v. Nolan

2. “Except for animal trespass, one who possesses or harbors a domestic animal that he does not know or have reason to know to be abnormally dangerous, is subject to liability for harm done by the animal if, but only if ... (b) he is negligent in fading to prevent the harm.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Savory v. Hensick · Miles Ex Rel. Miles v. Rich

3. “First, there was a dog allowed to run loose in the yard of defendant’s home and as a result the yard was not reasonably safe, and Second, defendant knew or by using ordinary care could have known of this condition, and Third, defendant failed to use ordinary care to remove the dog from the yard, restrain it, or warn the plaintiff of it, and Fourth, such negligence directly caused or directly contributed to cause damage to plaintiff.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Savory v. Hensick