The Francesco’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 4 district ·

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

1. ““I am unable, however, to agree to the correctness of this position. It was necessary that the tug should proceed to New York in order that it might take hold of the Francesco, and the fact that the parties may have expressly-agreed that the tug should proceed to that port and tow the bark thence to to Philadelphia imposed no more obligation upon the tug than if nothing had been said about proceeding to New York. The voyage thither would have been necessary, whether anything was said about it or not. What both parties had in mind was simply that the tug should furnish the motive power to bring the bark to the port of Philadelphia, and (except perhaps under unusual circunistances) the execution of such a contract would not be begun until the tug should be actually attached to the tow. Moreover, in the case now before the court, the tug was executing a contract of towage with the Bianehi, when it abandoned both contracts and took hold of the schooner. I think it would be an unwarranted refinement to hold that these two separate, independent contracts were being executed at the same time.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. The Somers N. Smith