Union Pac Ry Co v. O'Brien’s Empirical Analysis
161 U.S. 451 · 1896
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 3 district · 53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 128 later decisions (12 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1975 · most notably Seaboard Air Line Railway v. Horton (1914), Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf R. R. v. McDade (1903)
38 federal appellate · 3 district · 53 state decisions — followed in 24 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Hough v. Railway Co. · Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Cox · Union Pac Ry Co v. Snyder · Gardner v. Michigan Central 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 128 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The general rule undoubtedly is that a railroad company is bound to provide suitable and safe materials and structures in the construction of'its road and appurtenances,. and, if from a defective construction thereof an injury happen to one of its servants, the company is liable for the injury sustained. The servant undertakes the risks of the employment, as far as they spring from defects incident to the service, but he does not take the risks of the negligence of the master itself. The master is not to be held as guaranteeing or warranting absolute safety under all circumstances, but it is. bound, to exercise the care which the exigency reasonably demands in furnishing proper roadbed, track, and other structures, including sufficient culverts for the escape of water collected and accumulated by its embankments and excavations. Hough v. Railway Co., 100 U. S. 213 , 25 L. Ed. 612 ; Texas & Pacific Railway v. Cox, 145 U. S. 593 , 12 Sup. Ct. 905 , 36 L. Ed. 829 ; Gardner v. Michigan Central Railroad, 150 U. S. 349 , 359, 14 Sup. Ct. 140 , 37 L. Ed. 1107 ; Union Pacific Railway v. Daniels, 152 U. S. 684 , 14 Sup. Ct. 756 , 38 L. Ed. 597 ; Chicago & Northwestern Railroad v. Swett, 45 Ill. 197 , 92 Am. Dec. 206 ; Toledo & Peoria Railway v. Conroy, 68 Ill. 560 ; Stoher v. Iron Mountain Railway Co., 91 Mo. 509 , 4 S. W. 389 ; Paulmier v. Erie Railroad. 34 N. J. Law, 151 ; Snow v. Housatonic Railroad Co., 8 Allen (Mass.) 441, 85 Am. Dec. 720 ; Huddleston v. Lowell Machine Shop, 106”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The second instruction was properly refused because it confused two distinct propositions, that relating to the risks assumed by an employé in entering a given service, and that relating to the amount of vigilance that should be exercised under given circumstances.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Tlie second instruction was properly refused because it confused two propositions, — tliat- relating to the risks assumed by an employs in entering a given service, and that relating to the amount of vigilance that should be exercised under given circumstances.””
1 later decision 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.