Pokorny v. Ford Motor Co.

Pokorny, Administratrix of the Estate of Duffy v. Ford Motor Co.

Pokorny v. Ford Motor Co., 498 U.S. 853 (1990)

Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Decided: October 1, 1990
Docket: No. 90-174
Citations: 498 U.S. 853111 S. Ct. 147112 L. Ed. 2d 11359 U.S.L.W. 32471990 U.S. LEXIS 4551

Cited by 95 10 descriptions by later courts

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 10 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

(holding no error where a witness merely described her personal observations concerning the emotions of the victim during their counseling sessions)

State v. Sechrest, No. 20-256 (N.C. Ct. App. May 4, 2021)
(distinguishing casual encounter between police officer and college student from “the kind of association to which a specially protected constitutional right” might attach)

Ortiz v. San Miguel Cnty., 955 F. Supp. 1338 (D.N.M. 1996)
(“[I]t is well-established that a savings clause ... does not ‘save’ common law actions that would subvert a federal statutory or regulatory scheme.”)

Moore v. Brunswick Bowling & Billiards Corp., 889 S.W.2d 246 (Tex. 1994)
(the question of express preemption is properly analyzed only after consideration of both Sections 1392(d) and 1397(k))

Muntz v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., 674 A.2d 328 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1996)
("Indeed, a taxpayer who owes back taxes for several years may pay interest on and sue with respect to only one of them.”)

Prestop Holdings, LLC v. United States, 96 Fed. Cl. 244 (Fed. Cl. 2010)
(associations for purposes other than expression are more properly viewed as stemming from the Fourteenth Amendment right to substantive due process rather than from the First Amendment)

Shahar v. Bowers, 836 F. Supp. 859 (N.D. Ga. 1993)
(a common law rule cannot prohibit the exercise of a federally granted option)

Cellucci v. Gen. Motors Corp., 676 A.2d 253 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1996)
(the right of intimate association is not protected by the first amendment)

Payne v. Fontenot, 925 F. Supp. 414 (M.D. La. 1995)

Cited by 95 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

Hyundai Motor Co. v. Alvarado974 S.W.2d 1 (Tex. 1998)
Cooper v. General Motors Corp.702 So. 2d 428 (Miss. 1997)
Cellucci v. General Motors Corp.676 A.2d 253 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1996)
Perry v. Mercedes Benz of North America, Inc.761 F. Supp. 437 (M.D. La. 1991)
John F. Wroblewski v. City of Washburn965 F.2d 452 (7th Cir. 1992)
Cornelius Marshall v. Wilbert Allen, Richard Anderson, and Anthony J. Fusco, Jr.984 F.2d 787 (7th Cir. 1993)

Most recent

State v. RuffinNo. 24-276 (N.C. Ct. App. Mar. 5, 2025)
State v. SechrestNo. 20-256 (N.C. Ct. App. May 4, 2021)
State v. CoreyNo. 189PA18 (N.C. Dec. 6, 2019)
State v. Spinks808 S.E.2d 350 (N.C. Ct. App. 2017)
State v. Powell732 S.E.2d 491 (N.C. Ct. App. 2012)
State v. Allen731 S.E.2d 510 (N.C. Ct. App. 2012)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list