Lawing v. Trinity Manufacturing, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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

1. “of the sodium bromate for purposes of section 15-73­ 10, and thus reversing the trial court's decision to grant Trinity and Matrix summary judgment on the Lawings' strict liability cause of action? II. Whether the court of appeals erred in affirming the trial court's decision to charge the jury on the sophisticated user defense? 11 Black and Martin settled with Trinity and Matrix before trial. LAW/ANALYSIS I. Strict Liability Cause of Action Trinity and Matrix argue that the court of appeals erred in holding that Lawing was a”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lawing v. Univar, USA, Inc.

2. “illustrate that the [ALI] intended that the people to be excluded from the definition of 'user' and 'consumer' are much farther removed from the product than Lawing and his co-workers were from the sodium bromate.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lawing v. Univar, USA, Inc.

3. “the sophisticated user doctrine does not operate to defeat any duty. It simply identifies circumstances the jury must consider when determining whether the supplier's duty to warn was breached.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lawing v. Univar, USA, Inc.