Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 12 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Russo v. Home Goods, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Russo v. Home Goods, Inc. Anchor | green | “whether a condition is not inherently dangerous, or constitutes a reasonably safe environment, depends on the totality of the specific facts of each case.” | 4 |
| 2 | Russo v. Home Goods, Inc. | green | “depends on the totality of the specific facts of each case.” | 3 |
| 3 | Varon v. New York City Department of Education | green | “a landowner has no duty to protect or warn against an open and obvious condition which, as a matter of law, is not inherently dangerous.” | 3 |
| 4 | Benjamin v. Trade Fair Supermarket, Inc. | green | “readily observable by the reasonable use of one's senses.” | 2 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.