Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 959 F.2d 430 - Dillinger v. Caterpillar, Inc.

Dillinger v. Caterpillar, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

959 F.2d 430 · 1992

Citation profile

74
cited by 74 later decisions
2
states following
June 2016
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably United States v. Console (1993), Fleck v. KDI Sylvan Pools, Inc. (1992)

31 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 state decisions

380199220002010decided

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 Hamling v. United States · West v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. · City of Los Angeles v. Heller · Webb v. Zern · Berkebile v. Brantly Helicopter 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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “An intermediate appellate state court ... is a datum for ascertaining state law which is not to be disregarded by a federal court unless it is convinced by other persuasive data that the highest court of the state would decide otherwise.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “that the jury was influenced by the evidence concerning [his] failure to use the available lap belt in determining whether [defendant's] product was defective or whether a defect caused [plaintiff's] injuries,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “the introduction of ... non-use of the seat belts would be directly at odds with the [state] Supreme Court's dictates barring evidence of a plaintiff's negligence in [strict] liability proceedings.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.