Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 428 F.3d 786 - Young v. Pollock Engineering Group, Inc.

Young v. Pollock Engineering Group, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

428 F.3d 786 · 2005

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
March 2020
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 2020

9 federal appellate · 4 district ·

90200520102020decided

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

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Coffman v. Keene Corp. · James A. McKinnon v. Skil Corporation · Bilotta v. Kelley Co., Inc. · Ponticas v. K.M.S. Investments

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

  1. “[t]estimony may be excluded if an expert fails to explain how a proposed safety modification would protect the machine's operators without compromising the machine's utility”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the likelihood of harm, and the gravity of harm if it happens, against the burden of the precaution which would be effective to avoid the harm”
    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.