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.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 11 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 Uccello v. Laudenslayer.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Uccello v. Laudenslayer Anchor | green | “a duty of care arises when the landlord has actual knowledge of the presence of the dangerous animal and when he has the right to remove the animal by retaking possession of the premises.” | 5 |
| 2 | Clemmons v. Fidler | green | “promotes the salutary policy of placing responsibility where it belongs, rather than fostering a search for a defendant whose affluence is more apparent than his culpability.” | 4 |
| 3 | Uccello v. Laudenslayer | green | “that a duty of care arises when the landlord has actual knowledge of the presence of the dangerous animal and when he has the right to remove the animal by retaking possession of the premises.” | 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.