Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 133 MISC2D 43 - Howard v. Poseidon Pools, Inc.

Howard v. Poseidon Pools, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
April 1995
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 2051 (Consumer Product Safety Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 2064 (Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 2072

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

  1. ““Section 2072 contains no explicit grant of exclusive jurisdiction to the federal courts. Our review of the legislative history of the CPSA does not reveal any consideration of the jurisdictional question.... Finally, it is unlikely that Congress intended federal courts to have exclusive jurisdiction over private actions under the CPSA because most actions in which CPSA claims are asserted would also include claims of state common law violations such as negligence, breach of warranty, and strict product liability. Any intent by Congress to require all of these actions to be brought in federal courts would have to be explicit.””
    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.