Box v. Postal Telegraph-Cable Co.’s Empirical Analysis
165 F. 138 · 1908
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1950
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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
Relies on Primrose v. Western Union Telegraph Co. · Western Union Telegraph Co. v. James · Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Henderson · Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Broesche · Birney v. New York & Washington Printing Telegraph Co.
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The message must, of course, be sent before it can be repeated; it must be sent and repeated before any comparison could be made. Although the regulation purports to be made to guard against mistakes or delays, it should be construed to refer to such mistakes and delays as could be corrected or avoided by repetition and comparison. * * * It is difficult to believe that this stipulation was intended by the parties to be applicable to a case in which the conduct of the company made it impossible for the message to be repeated.” Box v. Telegraph Co. (C. C. A.) 165 F. 138 , 141, 28 L. R. A. (N. S.) 566 .”
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.