Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 108 U.S. 317 - Baltimore v. Fifth Baptist Church

Baltimore v. Fifth Baptist Church’s Empirical Analysis

108 U.S. 317 · 1883

Citation profile

420
cited by 420 later decisions
12
cited 12 times by the Supreme Court
35
states following
June 2021
most recently cited

67 federal appellate · 11 district · 276 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 420 later decisions (12 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2021 · most notably Sharp v. United States (1903), Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company v. City of Goldsboro (1914)

67 federal appellate · 11 district · 276 state decisions — followed in 35 states

700188318901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Radcliff's Executors v. . Mayor, C. of Brooklyn · Bellinger v. . the New York Central Railroad · In Re N.Y. and H.R.R. Co. v. . Kip · Brown v. . the Cayuga and Susquehanna Railroad Co.

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 420 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “any claim of a private citizen for damages for any special inconvenience and discomfort not experienced by the public at large.”
    22 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “That “the company possessed the right to select the location in question, and to construct, maintain, and use upon it such engine house and other works as were necessary and expedient for the construction, maintenance, and repair of its road and engines, and to occupy the premises for that purpose; and that, if the jury found that the inconveniences complained of were no more nor greater than the natural or probable result of maintaining such engine house and repair shop, or found that in the occupation and use of the property and management of its business the company exercised such reasonable care as a person of ordinary prudence and caution would exercise under the circumstances, it was not liable for any damages.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “make and construct all works whatever, which might 'be necessary and expedient',”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.