Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 167 F.2d 265 - Fleming v. Kellett

Fleming v. Kellett’s Empirical Analysis

167 F.2d 265 · 1948

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
3
states following
December 1996
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently December 1996

20 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

120194819501960197019801990decided

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

Applies 45 U.S.C. § 51 (Federal Employers' Liability Act)

Relies on Lavender v. Kurn · Tennant v. Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Co. · Brady v. Southern Railway Co. · Tiller v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad · Johnson v. United States

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

  1. ““* * * q'kjg reasoning [0f the railroad] would be sound if we accept as a conclusive fact that the slipping from the step of the ladder was the sole cause of the fall which resulted in the injuries. But the fallacy of this argument is that it assumes too much. Even though appellee accidentally slipped from the step through no fault of the Railroad, he was nevertheless entitled to a reasonably safe place on which to attempt to regain his footing, and if he failed to regain his footing and his fall was precipitated by the uneven and insecure condition of the roadbed where he was required to alight, we cannot say that such condition was not a substantial factor in bringing about the harm. “If the injury was caused by either the act of slipping from the step, for which the Railroad was not responsible, or alighting upon an uneven and insecure roadbed, for which it was responsible, either one of which was sufficient to bring about the injuries, it was for the jury to determine which of the two was the substantial factor and legal cause. See Restatement of Torts, Sec. 432(2) and 434.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “only when there is a complete absence of probative facts * * *.”
    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.