Lohrmann v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
782 F.2d 1156 · 1986
Citation profile
45 federal appellate · 21 district · 89 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 205 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. Sheward (1999), Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia (1992)
45 federal appellate · 21 district · 89 state decisions — followed in 22 states
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 Patterson v. United States · Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. · Lovelace v. Sherwin-Williams Co. · Ingram v. United States · Phipps v. General Motors Corp.
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 205 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To support a reasonable inference of substantial causation from circumstantial evidence, there must be evidence of exposure to a specific product on a regular basis over some extended period of time in proximity to where the plaintiff actually worked.”
18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“frequency, regularity and proximity test”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'State of the art includes all of the available knowledge on a subject at a given time, and this includes scientific, medical, engineering, and any other knowledge that may be available. State of the art includes the element of time: What is known and when was this knowledge available.'”
5 later decisions 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.