The Oregon’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

359 federal appellate · 202 district · 41 state decisions

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

1. “the judgment of a competent sailor in extremis cannot be impugned.”

   17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Phinney v. The Le Lion · Handy v. Adams

2. ““Here is a simple agreement to become responsible for the final decree rendered in the cause in which the stipulation is given, and the words ‘for the benefit of whom it may concern’ refer undoubtedly to the owners of the Clan Mackenzie, in whose behalf Simpson, the master, had filed the libel. We know of no authority which permits the -liability of sureties upon such a stipulation to be enlarged by the inclusion of claims other than the ones which the stipulators agree to pay. To such a claim the surety may well reply non in hme foedera veni. The stipulators may be so well satisfied that the claimant has a defence to the original libel as to be willing to take upon themselves the contingency of a decree requiring its payment, but they may neither know, nor be able to conjecture, what other, demands may be made against the property.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. The Cerea · Overstreet v. Water Vessel

3. ““I cannot entirely accede to the position which has been laid down in behalf of the claimant that these bonds are mere personal security given to the individual captor, because I think they are given to the court as securities to abide the adjudication of all facts at the time impending before it. The court is not in the habit of considering the effect of bonds precisely in the same limited way as they are viewed by the courts of common law. * * * In this place they are subject to more enlarged considerations. They arei here regarded as pledges or substitutes for the thing itself in all points fairly in the adjudication before the court.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Southern Pacific Co. · The Livingstone