Richmond, F. & P. R. Co. v. Brooks’s Empirical Analysis
197 F.2d 404 · 1952
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently November 1973 · most notably Troupe v. Chicago, Duluth & Georgian Bay Transit Co. (1956), Hanna v. Fletcher (1956)
23 federal appellate · 4 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.
Relationships
Applies 45 U.S.C. § 1 · 45 U.S.C. § 51 (Federal Employers' Liability Act)
Relies on United States v. American Trucking Associations · Sorrells v. United States · Palmer v. Hoffman · Brady v. Southern Railway Co. · Milwaukee and Saint Paul Railway Company v. Kellogg
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The [Safety Appliance] Act contemplates a system of power control emanating from the engine. It is there the power is generated and the engineer functions. Pressure is built up in the brake system through control exerted by the engineer in the engine. He can manipulate this pressure to regulate the speed of the train and obviate the danger and uncertainty of control by hand brakes. But if, as a part of such a power system the appliances actually installed, as in this case, place control also in the conductor, efficient functioning remains essential. Delegation of partial control to the conductor does not avail to permit inefficient operation of the appliances when control is actually exercised by the conductor.””
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.