Staggs v. Chrysler Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard established under this subchapter is in effect, no State or political subdivision of a State shall have any authority either to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment any safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such vehicle or item of equipment which is not identical to the Federal standard. Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing any State from enforcing any safety standard which is identical to a Federal safety standard. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the federal Government or the government of any State or political subdivision thereof from establishing a safety requirement applicable to motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment procured for its own use if such requirement imposes a higher standard of performance than that required to comply with the otherwise applicable Federal standard.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 389 Pa. Super. 328 - Gingold v. Audi-Nsu-Auto Union, A.G. · 702 F. Supp. 532 - Kolbeck v. General Motors Corp.

2. “). Section 108(c) of the Safety Act provides that”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 752 F. Supp. 894 - Amrhein v. Quaker Oats Co.