365 F. Supp. 2d 218 - Gray v. Derderian’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 district ·

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

1. “a. failure to use due care in the manufacture, sale or distribution of the insulation; b. failure to make or cause to be made reasonable research and/or testing as to the effects of the insulation; c. failure to otherwise adequately test the insulation before providing it, distributing it or selling it; d. failure to warn potential and actual users of the product of its potential hazards, including but not limited to its unsuitability for use as an exposed interior surface without proper thermal barrier susceptible to exposure to heat or flame; e. failure to properly and adequately educate users about the use and hazards of the insulation; f. failing to provide adequate protection for persons coming into contact with the insulation, such as plaintiffs, from suffering the injuries which plaintiffs suffered; and g. otherwise failing to use due care in the design, manufacture, testing, inspecting, marketing^] advertising, labeling, packaging, provision, distribution and/or sale of the insulation”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gray v. Derderian

2. “If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 448 F. Supp. 2d 351 - Gray v. Derderian

3. “The rule above stated is subject to the qualification that, if the intervening act is such as might reasonably have been anticipated as the natural or probable result of the original negligence, the original negligence will, notwithstanding such intervening act, be regarded as the proximate cause of the injury, and will render the person guilty of it chargeable.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gray v. Derderian