Martin v. MAPCO Ammonia Pipeline, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that evidence of Pipeline Safety Act and its regulations is admissible as evidence to show the appropriate standard of care and defendant’s conformity with that standard, but cannot be considered conclusive proof of negligence or absence of negligence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).