Bradley v. Eccles’s Empirical Analysis
120 F. 947 · 1903
Citation profile
Relationships
Relies on Edward Barr Co. v. New York & New Haven Automatic Sprinkler Co. · American Coat Pad Co. of Baltimore City v. Phœnix Pad Co. · Consolidated Fastener Co. v. American Fastener Co. · First National Bank of Marietta v. Hovey, Iams & Co. · Glaenzer v. Wiederer
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(1) The combination with the draft-eye, composed of a fixed section and a movable section, of a spring-arm secured at one end and free at the other, a cam-lever pivoted to the free end of said spring-arm, and a tie attached to the cam-lever outside of its fulcrum, and connecting the cam-lever with the movable section of the draft-eye, whereby the spring-arm exerts a constant pressure upon the movable section, and also holds the cam-lever yieldingly in a locked position, substantially as set forth. “(2) The combination, with the axle, of a draft-eye composed of a forwardly projecting fixed section and a movable section hinged to.the front end of the fixed section, a spring-arm secured to the axle, and projecting forwardly therefrom, a cam-lever hinged to the free front end of the spring-arm, and a tie attached to the cam-lever outside of its fulcrum, and connecting the cam-lever with the hinged section of the draft-eye, substantially as set forth.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bradley v. Eccles
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.