The Mars’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 2 district ·

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.

1. ““There is considerable evidence offered for the purpose of showing that the machinery was generally out of order, but I am not convinced that this was the case. It was the ordinary experience with machinery that requires constant attention in order that it may be kept up to the standard. It was not defective or out of repair to an extent that the tug should be liable for any injuries resulting therefrom, and for this reason we do not think the respondent is liable to the libelant in damages for the injury. There was no failure of ordinary care on the part of the owners or the tug to furnish a safe place for the libelant to do his work, and the machinery about which he was working and the implements used in the performance of his work were safe and in good condition, save and except the ordinary current repairs necessary to keep them in such condition. The injury to the libelant was the result of an accident while performing certain work with which he was acquainted, and which should have been performed in a careful manner to avoid the very injury he received. He is therefore not entitled to recover damages'against the respondent.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. The Mars