Basil v. Cyr’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently December 1978
1 district · 2 state decisions
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 33 U.S.C. § 901
Relies on Voris v. Eikel · Bethlehem Steel Co. v. Parker · 58 F. Supp. 697 - Oldman Boiler Works, Inc. v. McManigal
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The normal conclusion to be drawn from this alleged telephone conversation is that plaintiff had not the intention of making any claim for which his employer was liable. It is true that the provisions of the statute relative to notice are to be construed liberally in favor of the claimant. It is believed that no construction of the Act has gone so far as to hold the cláim sufficient where there was no semblance of the assertion of any claim.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Well, Monday morning I was supposed to go to work and my wife called John Freeman who is the head foreman. She notified him I was sick and I had to have a doctor. So there was no doctor offered, so my wife said she would have to get my own doctor, our Dr. Urban. Dr. Urban came.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““The testimony in the instant case discloses that plaintiff knew that notice should be given to the employer and he may have considered the telephone talk sufficient, but that does not satisfy the need of a notice to the employer.””
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.