Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 678 F.2d 128 - Capital Electric Line Builders of Kansas, Inc. v. Marshall

Capital Electric Line Builders of Kansas, Inc. v. Marshall’s Empirical Analysis

678 F.2d 128 · 1982

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
August 2020
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2020 · most notably L. E. Myers Co. v. Secretary of Labor (1987), New York State Electric & Gas Corporation v. Secretary of Labor and Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (1996)

6 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

10019821990200020102020decided

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 29 U.S.C. § 661 (§ 12 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970) · 29 U.S.C. § 666 (§ 17 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970)

Relies on Lassiter v. Department of Social Services · National Realty & Construction Co. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission · Cape & Vineyard Division v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission · Brennan v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission · Brennan v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission

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

  1. “by showing that the violation was foreseeable because of inadequacies in safety precautions, training of employees, or supervision.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “it is not sufficient that [OSHA] merely show the existence of the violation, [it] must also prove that the employer had knowledge of the violation.”
    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.