82 N.J. Super. 8 - Foy v. Dayko’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently August 2008 · most notably 125 N.J. Super. 263 - Boileau v. De Cecco (1973), DeRobertis v. Randazzo (1983)
33 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 Carlo v. the Okonite-Callender Cable Co. · Canavan v. George · Emmons v. Stevane · Ryan v. Marren · Bateman v. Johnson
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The owner of any dog which shall bite a person while such person is on or in a public place, or lawfully on or in a private place, including the property of the owner of the dog, shall be liable for such damages as may be suffered by the person bitten, regardless of the former viciousness of such dog or the owner's knowledge of such viciousness. For the purpose of this section, a person is lawfully upon the private property of such owner when he is on the property in the performance of any duty imposed upon him by the laws of this state or the laws or postal regulations of the United States, or when he is on such property upon the invitation, express or implied, of the owner thereof.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“we are not persuaded that the Legislature intended ... to make an owner liable for injuries by dog bite where the injured person's own careless or provocative conduct was a contributory causal factor in the mischance. " Ibid. (emphasis added). In Foy , plaintiff was prevented from entering a tavern with his own dog. He confronted the tavern owner's dog and began making "grr, grr, grr”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he patent indefensibility of allowing a person who provokes an animal into attacking him from recovery of damages from its owner has led practically all courts which have considered the question to allow such a defense as against a statutory cause of action not expressly mentioning it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.