Powell v. Sappington’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 7 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Recognition of such an exception [to the lex loci delicti rule] . . . would create a broad avenue for abuse. As another court has stated, '[adoption of this exception would allow] a claimant with a choice of jurisdictions in a compensation claim . . . to juggle with the substantive law uniformly applied . . . and thus defeat its application.' Wardell v. Richmond Screw Anchor Co. , 133 Ga. App. 378 , 382 , 210 S.E.2d 854 , 857 (1974). We therefore hold that a claimant who is injured in another state cannot evade the application of the lex loci delicti rule merely by filing his workmen's compensation claim in Alabama."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Northeast Utilities v. PITTMAN TRUCKING · 715 So. 2d 795 - Fitzgerald v. Austin

2. “in the [workers'] compensation context where an injured employee . . . elect[s] to accept benefits under the [workers'] compensation act of his state of employment and not the state where the injury occurred.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 715 So. 2d 795 - Fitzgerald v. Austin

3. “because Powell elected to pursue his remedy under the Alabama Workmen's Compensation Act rather than under the Georgia Workmen's Compensation Act, Alabama law rather than Georgia law applies to [the] action.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Northeast Utilities v. PITTMAN TRUCKING