Poulos v. HPC, INC.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 13 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Appellant, in attempting to demonstrate [appellee’s] alleged culpable negligence, relies heavily on violations of OSHA regulations concerning safety training and equip ment. While these asserted violations may constitute evidence of ordinary negligence, they do not demonstrate a state of mind consistent with culpable negligence, which requires knowledge or obviousness of a high probability of harm. (Emphasis in original.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. McKennan v. Newman · Smith v. Throckmartin

2. “tanks and had become aware of the highly dangerous and harmful nature of the fumes contained in the tanks and that because of his physical reaction to the fumes he had been told by the tank lessee's representative to have only one worker at a time in the tanks for only a brief period of time. Despite his awareness of the danger and the instruction to him, Kennison again entered the tank where the fumes were stronger than before and allowed co-employee Poulos to join him. Both men lost consciousness and had to be lifted out of the tank. Poulos died. This court said that from this evidence,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brebaugh v. Hales

3. “The trier of fact could reasonably find a known or obvious risk presenting a high probability of harm.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brebaugh v. Hales