Williams v. Pro-Tec, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
908 F.2d 345 · 1990
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently January 2012
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Means v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. · Holmgren v. Massey-Ferguson, Inc. · Fox v. Dannenberg · Federal Crop Insurance v. Hester · Carlsen v. Javurek
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Expert testimony may be properly excluded if the jury ... is equally able to draw the asserted conclusion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Watkins v. Schriver
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.