Ceco Corp. v. Coleman’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 15 district · 58 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably Howard University v. Best (1984), Joy v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (1993)
13 federal appellate · 15 district · 58 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 33 U.S.C. § 904 · 33 U.S.C. § 905 · 33 U.S.C. § 933 · 5 U.S.C. § 8116
Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts · Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn · Palmer v. Hoffman · Halcyon Lines v. Haenn Ship Ceiling & Refitting Corp.
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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]here a particular statutory or regulatory standard is enacted to protect persons in plaintiff's position or to prevent the type of accident that occurred, and the plaintiff can establish his relationship to the statute, unexplained violation of that standard renders the defendant negligent as a matter of law.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage““[W]here a particular statutory or regulatory standard is enacted to protect persons in plaintiffs position or to prevent the type of accident that occurred, and the plaintiff can establish his relationship to the statute, unexplained violation of that standard renders the defendant negligent as a matter of law.” If a party charged with statutory or regulatory negligence produces competent evidence tending to explain or excuse his or her violation of the statutory or regulatory standard, the jury is properly instructed, upon proper request of the party, that the violation is evidence of negligence, but not negligence as a matter of law.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The negligent act of a third party will operate as a superseding cause of the plaintiff's harm only where the original actor should not have anticipated that act.”
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.