Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 121 MASS 508 - Kelley v. Norcross

Kelley v. Norcross’s Empirical Analysis

1877

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
9
states following
June 1915
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently June 1915 · most notably Bowen v. Chicago, Burlington & Kansas City Railway Co. (1888), Moynihan v. Hills Co. (1888)

1 federal appellate · 38 state decisions

14018771880189019001910decided

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 Coombs v. New Bedford Cordage Co. · Ford v. Fitchburg Railroad · Arkerson v. Dennison

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

  1. ““ There was no evidence that the men were not in all respects competent workmen, or that the materials provided were unsuitable; and, without some such evidence, there was upon these points no question upon which the plaintiff was entitled to go to the jury. If there was neglect on the part of the carpenters, either in the construction of the staging or in leaving it, after it had been partially constructed, to be continued or completed by the masons, it was the neglect of the fellow-servants of the plaintiff’s intestate, who were competent to have properly performed the work.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Where, however, the master does not undertake the duty of furnishing or adapting the appliances by which the work is to be performed, but this duty is intrusted to or assumed by the workmen themselves, within the scope of their employment, he is exempt from responsibility, if suitable materials are furnished and suitable workmen are employed by him, even if they negligently do that which they thus undertake.””
    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.