Williamson v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 federal appellate · 5 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In other words, the mere fact that an agency regulation allows manufacturers a choice between options is insufficient to justify implied pre-emption; courts should only find pre-emption where evidence exists that an agency has a regulatory objective-- e.g., obtaining a mix of passive restraint mechanisms, as in Geier --whose achievement depends on manufacturers having a choice between options.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF VOSE

2. ““people who are familiar with and in the habit of wearing lap/shoulder belts in the front seat find lap/ shoulder belts in the rear seat, it stands to reason that they would be more likely to wear those belts when riding in the rear seat.” 53 Fed. Reg. 47983 (1988).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Williamson v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc.

3. “the regulation's history, the agency's contemporaneous explanation, and its consistently held interpretive views.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Canyon Fuel Co. v. Sec'y of Labor