Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2000 WI App 103 - Taft v. Derricks

2000 WI App 103 - Taft v. Derricks’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
July 2021
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 653 (§ 4 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970) · 29 U.S.C. § 654 (§ 5 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970) · 29 U.S.C. § 658 (§ 9 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970)

Relies on Dippel v. Sciano · 70 Wis. 2d 836 - Antoniewicz v. Reszczynski · 197 Wis. 2d 409 - Rockweit v. Senecal · Wendland v. Ridgefield Construction Services, Inc. · 91 Wis. 2d 734 - Pagelsdorf v. Safeco Insurance Co. of America

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

  1. “Derrick’s status as a small farmer also influences our rejection of the claim that his violation of an OSHA standard constitutes negligence per se. Congress has repeatedly enacted legislation that prohibits federal funds from being used to prescribe, issue, administer, or enforce any OSHA standard, rule, regulation, or order that is applicable to a farming operation that does not maintain a temporary labor camp and employs ten or fewer employees. [Citation omitted.] Thus, a small family farmer like Derricks is not subject to OSHA enforcement of either the specific standards or the general duty clause. The appropriation riders further inform on Congress’s intent to insulate farmers from OSHA.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[W]hen the legislature or an administrative agency prescribes what particular acts shall or shall not be done, the statute or rule may be interpreted as establishing a standard of care, 'deviation from which constitutes negligence.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.