Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 116 U.S. 366 - Little v. Hackett

Little v. Hackett’s Empirical Analysis

116 U.S. 366 · 1886

Citation profile

311
cited by 311 later decisions
9
cited 9 times by the Supreme Court
35
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

92 federal appellate · 12 district · 167 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 311 later decisions (9 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2018 · most notably Standard Oil Company v. Edward Anderson (1909), Pointer v. United States (1894)

92 federal appellate · 12 district · 167 state decisions — followed in 35 states

72018861890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Barrett v. . the Third Avenue R.R. Co. · Blake v. . Ferris · Dyer v. . Erie Railway Company · Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. Shacklet

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

  1. ““That one cannot recover damages for an injury to the commission of which he has directly contributed is a rule of established law and a principle of ' common justice. " And it matters not whether that contribution consists in his participation in the direct cause of the injury, or in his omission of duties which, if performed; would have prevented it. If his - fault, whether omission or commission, has been the proximate cause of the injury, he is without remedy against one also in the wrong.””
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ The truth is, the decision in Thorogood v. Bryan rests upon indefensible ground. The identification of the passenger with the negligent driver or the owner, without his personal co-operation or encouragement, is a gratuitous assumption. There is- no such identity. The parties are not in the same position. The owner of a public conveyance is a carrier, and the driver, or the person managing it, is his servant. Neither of them is the servant of the passenger, and his asserted identity with them is contradicted by the daily experience of the world."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““A person who hires a public hack, and gives the driver directions as to the place to which he wishes to be conveyed, but exercises no other control over the conduct of the driver, is not responsible for his acts or negligence.””
    2 later decisions 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.