Munson S. S. Line v. Miramar S. S. Co.’s Empirical Analysis
167 F. 960 · 1909
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 1969 · most notably Langnes v. Green (1931), Standard Oil Co. v. Southern Pacific Co. (1925)
19 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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
Relationships
Relies on The Paquete Habana · Sinclair v. Cooper · The Camanche · Irvine v. The Hesper · The Charles Morgan
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““7. New Allegations, etc. Upon sufficient cause shown, this court, or any judge thereof, may allow either appellant or appellee to make .new allegations or pray different relief or interpose a new defense, or make new proofs. Application for such leave may be made at any time after the perfecting of the appeal to this court, and within fifteen days after the filing in this court of the apostles, and upon at least four days’ notice to the adverse party or his attorney of record. “8. New Pleadings — New Testimony. If leave be granted to make new allegations, pray different relief, or interpose a new defense, the moving party shall within ten days thereafter, serve such new pleading, duly verified on the adverse party, who shall, if such pleading be a libel, within twenty days answer on oath.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. The Tokai Maru““ We do not think that the fact that the claimants did not appeal from the decree of the District Court alters the rule. When the libellants appealed, they did so in view of the rule, and took the risk of the result of a trial of the case de novo. The whole case was opened by their appeal, as much as it would have been if both parties had appealed, or if the appeal had been taken only by the claimants.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Langnes v. Green“An appeal in admiralty has the effect to supersede and vacate the decree from which it is taken. A new trial, completely and entirely new, with other testimony and other pleadings, if necessary, or if asked for, is contemplated, a trial in which the judgment of the court below is regarded as though it had never been rendered.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. The Ernest H. Meyer
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.