Smith v. Lockheed Propulsion Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
4 district · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably 32 Cal. 3d 229 - Wilson v. Interlake Steel Co. (1982), 534 F. Supp. 1046 - In Re "Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation (1982)
4 district · 42 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act)
Relies on Dalehite v. United States · United States v. Causby · 55 Cal. 2d 211 - Muskopf v. Corning Hospital District · Malone v. Bowdoin · Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co.
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The crucial consideration in determining whether expert testimony should be received is whether `... the subject of the inquiry is one of such common knowledge that men of ordinary education could reach a conclusion as intelligently as the witness or whether, on the other hand, the matter is sufficiently beyond common experience that the opinion of an expert would assist the trier of fact.'" (p. 783.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““In these circumstances, public policy calls for strict liability. (Luthringer v. Moore, supra, 31 Cal.2d 489, 500 , 190 P.2d 1 ; Rest., Torts, 520). There is no basis, either in reason or justice, for requiring the innocent neighboring landowner to bear the loss. Defendant, who is engaged in the enterprise for profit, is in a position best able to administer the loss so that it will ultimately be borne by the public. As Professor Prosser summarizes the rationale for the imposition of strict liability: ‘The problem is dealt with as one of allocating a more or less inevitable loss to be charged against a complex and dangerous civilization, and liability is placed upon the party best able to shoulder it.’ (Prosser, Law of Torts, (2d ed. 1955) page 318).””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Although a finding of causation may not be based on mere speculation or conjecture, such finding may be predicated on reasonable inferences drawn from circumstantial evidence.”
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.