Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 708 F. Supp. 1260 - Lewis v. Snap-On Tools Corp.

708 F. Supp. 1260 - Lewis v. Snap-On Tools Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 2017

1 district · 2 state decisions

901989199020002010decided

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

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Scheuer v. Rhodes · 335 Pa. Super. 141 - Harris by Harris v. Easton Pub. Co. · Santiesteban v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

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

  1. “In any civil action, no claim for punitive damages shall be permitted unless there is a reasonable showing by evidence in the record or proffered by the claimant which would provide a reasonable basis for recovery of such damages. The claimant may move to amend his complaint to assert a claim for punitive damages as allowed by the rules of civil procedure.”
    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.