Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 129 U.S. 397 - Liverpool Steam Co v. Phenix Ins Co

Liverpool Steam Co v. Phenix Ins Co’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

254
cited by 254 later decisions
7
cited 7 times by the Supreme Court
37
states following
February 2024
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 24 district · 117 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 254 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2024 · most notably United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (1949), Richardson v. Shaw (1908)

27 federal appellate · 24 district · 117 state decisions — followed in 37 states

520188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 The Harrisburg · Burgess v. Seligman · Hart v. Pennsylvania Railroad · The Lottawanna · Pritchard Ex'X v. Norton

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

  1. “"The carrier and bis customer do not stand upon a footing of equality. The individual customer lias no real freedom of choice. He cannot afford to higgle or stand out, and seek redress in the courts. He prefers rather to accept any bill of lading or to sign any paper that the carrier presents; and in most cases he has no alternative but to do this, or to abandon his business.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““From the very nature of the contract of insurance, asa contract of indemnity, the insurer, upon ¡laying to the assured the amount of a loss, total or partial, of the goods insured, becomes, without any formal assignment, or any express stipulation to that effect in the policy, subrogated in a corresponding amount to the assured's rights of action against the carrier, or other person responsible for the loss, and in a court of admiralty may assert in his own name that right of the shipper.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““But the ordinary contract of a carrier does involve an obligation on Ills part to use due care and skill in navigating the vessel and carrying the goods; and, as is everywhere held, an exception, in the bill of lading, of perils of the sea, or other specified perils does not excuse him from that obligation, or exempt him from liability for loss or damage from one of those perils, to which the negligence of himself or his servants has contributed.””
    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.