The Carl’s Empirical Analysis
18 F. 655 · 1883
Citation profile
5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 1917
5 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.
Relationships
Relies on Gerrity v. Bark Kate Cann · Plank v. N.Y. Central and Hudson River Railroad Company · The Helios · Dwyer v. National Steam-Ship Co. · The Kate Cann
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This negligence was, therefore, not merely contributory, but it was the immediate and proximate cause of the accident. The covering of the hatch above was but the preliminary and indirect cause, not necessarily or naturally producing the subsequent fall of the libelant.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. The Scandinavia
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.