Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 123 F.2d 487 - Thomson v. Boles

Thomson v. Boles’s Empirical Analysis

123 F.2d 487 · 1941

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
June 2016
most recently cited

36 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2016 · most notably Bailey v. Central Vermont Railway, Inc. (1943), Miller v. Avirom (1967)

36 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

13019411950196019701980199020002010decided

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

Applies 45 U.S.C. § 51 (Federal Employers' Liability Act)

Relies on United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. · Pennsylvania Company v. Roy · Armour v. Hahn · London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Woelfle · Rocco v. Lehigh Valley Railroad

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

  1. “[where an improper remark is made during closing argument], counsel may, and preferably should, make [the] objection, take [an] exception, or ask for remedial action at the close thereof and before the case is submitted to the jury.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “cannot as a rule remain silent, interpose no objections, and after a verdict has been returned seize for the first time on the point that the comments to the jury were improper and prejudicial.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.