The Carib Prince’s Empirical Analysis
170 U.S. 655 · 1898
Citation profile
103 federal appellate · 74 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 290 later decisions (42 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1983 · most notably Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, Inc. (1960), Mahnich v. Southern Steamship Co. (1944)
103 federal appellate · 74 district · 6 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on The Caledonia · Compania De Navigacion La Flecha v. Brauer · Stuart v. Hayden · Baker v. Cummings
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 290 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Sec. 3. That if the owner of any vessel transporting merchandise or property to or from any port in the United States of America shall exereise due diligence to- make the said vessel in all respects seaworthy and properly manned, equipped, and supplied, neither the vessel, her owner or owners, agent, or charterers, shall become or be held responsible for damage or loss resulting from faults or errors in navigation or in the management of said vessel nor shall the vessel, her owner or owners, charterers, agent, or master be held liable for losses arising from dangers of the sea or other navigable waters, acts of God, or public enemies, or the inherent defect, quality, or vice of the thing carried, or from iusufficieney of package, or seizure under legal process, or for loss resulting from a,ny act or omission of the shipper or owner of the goods, his agent or representative, or from saving or attempting to save life or property at sea, or from any deviation in rendering such service.””
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The exemption of the owners or charterers from loss resulting from ‘faults or errors in navigation or in the management of the vessel,’ and for certain other designated causes, in no way implies that, because the owner is thus exempted when he has been duly diligent, thereby the law has also relieved him from the duty of furnishing a seaworthy vessel. The immunity from risks of a described character, when due diligence has been used, cannot be so extended as to cause the statute to say that the owner, when he has been duly diligent, is not only exempted in accordance with the tenor of the statute from the limited and designated risks which are named therein, but is also relieved, as respects every claim of every other description, from the duty of furnishing a seaworthy ship.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In every contract for the carriage of goods by sea, unless otherwise expressly stipulated, there is a warranty on the part of the shipowner that the ship is seaworthy at the time of beginning her voyage, and not merely that he does not know her to be unseaworthy. * * * The warranty is absolute that the ship is, or shall be, in fact seaworthy at that time, and does not depend on his knowledge or ignorance, his care or negligence.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. The Indrapura · Line v. Pendleton
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.