McCormick v. Shippy’s Empirical Analysis
119 F. 226 · 1902
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 1933
2 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Sun Printing Publishing Association v. William L Moore · Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railway Co. v. Voigt · United States v. Shea · Hartford Fire Insurance Company v. Chicago Milwaukee St Paul Railway Company · Leary v. United States
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““I find that the yacht was delivered to the charterer in conformity with the provisions of the contract, and remained under the charge of the master, who had been for some time before employed by the owner when the yacht was in his own service, and who was regarded by him as entirely competent to navigate the yacht, both as master and pilot, in any waters with which he was familiar, and in any waters within the limits of the contract, in conjunction with local pilots. The owner recommended the master to the charterer fully in these respects, and he was accepted and relied upon by the latter, who was not himself competent to navigate the yacht, in all respects in which a yacht owner or charterer might reasonably depend upon an expert navigator. During the earlier part of the chartered period the yacht had been employed in trips east, through Long Island Sound. Upon one of these trips the charterer had mentioned to the master a possible trip to the Delaware Bay, in the vicinity of Cape May, and on the 8th of September, when the yacht was in New York Harbor, the charterer gave orders to the master to fit her out for such a trip. The master was not familiar with the waters of Delaware Bay, or the approaches thereto, but said there would be no difficulty in making a daylight run, and asked for charts of the vicinity, which the charterer provided. The start was made on the 10th, though not at as early an hour as was expected, and it was getting dark when the vicinity of Atlantic Ci”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McCormick v. Shippy““(1) That the charterer shall provide and pay for all coal, port charges, pilotage, provisions, wages of crew, deck, engine room and other necessary stores, and all other charges whatsoever, and shall maintain the yacht in a thoroughly efficient state, in hull and machinery, for and during the service. The yacht to be delivered in commission by the owner. “(2) That the charterer shall assume no responsibility for loss or damage to the yacht.” “(4) •> * Hire to continue until her delivery in like good order and condition to the owner, unless lost, at New York, N. Y.” “(7) That, should the yacht be lost, hire paid in advance and not earned, reckoned from the day of her loss, shall be returned to the charterer.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McCormick v. Shippy
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.