Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 183 MISC 6 - Calfapietra v. Walsh

Calfapietra v. Walsh’s Empirical Analysis

1944

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
3
states following
August 1967
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently August 1967

10 state decisions

50194419501960decided

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 Cherubino v. Meenan · Bell v. District Court of Holyoke · Matter of Natilson v. Hodson · Reichelderfer v. Ihrie

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

  1. ““Accordingly, since it is the duty of the fire commissioner to prevent and extinguish fires and protect life and property at any place within the city, it would seem that he has power, under charter, sec. 885 (supra), to promulgate a rule prohibiting outside employment, if such a rule is essential for the efficient conduct of the fire department and reasonably necessary to carry out his powers and duties. . . . “. . . as has been wisely remarked, conflagrations wait on no man. For that reason, a fireman is potentially on duty at all times. He is obliged to answer alarms even when off duty. To be efficient, he must at all times be in good physical condition. . . . Moreover, if one member of the force were permitted to accept outside employment, the same privilege would have to be extended to others. The result, if the practice became widespread, might be disastrous. . . . “. . . when one seeks a position as fireman he must, in the very nature of his employment, subordinate, to the extent necessary to accomplish the end sought, rights which are personal to the commonweal.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.