Hudson v. Lazarus’s Empirical Analysis
217 F.2d 344 · 1954
Citation profile
52 federal appellate · 15 district · 34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 113 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Waldon v. Covington (1980), Gypsum Carrier, Inc. v. Handelsman (1962)
52 federal appellate · 15 district · 34 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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 38 U.S.C. § 706 · 45 U.S.C. § 51 (Federal Employers' Liability Act)
Relies on United States v. Standard Oil Co. · Chesapeake Ohio Railway Company v. Addie Kelly · St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Craft · Vicksburg v. Putnam · Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railroad v. Carroll
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 113 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In general the law seeks to award compensation, and no more, for personal injuries negligently inflicted. Yet an injured person may usually recover in full from a wrongdoer regardless of anything he may get from a `collateral source' unconnected with the wrongdoer. Usually the collateral contribution necessarily benefits either the injured person or the wrongdoer. Whether it is a gift or the product of a contract of employment or of insurance, the purposes of the parties to it are obviously better served and the interests of society are likely to be better served if the injured person is benefitted than if the wrongdoer is benefitted."”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We think a disability is not, in itself, ‘pain and suffering’. It is not within the ordinary meaning of those words and we see no reason to think Congress used the words in a special sense. A disabled man may or may not suffer pain. Even if he does, after his death his administrator cannot recover for his pain and suffering. But in our opinion his administrator may recover for his disabilities.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““On the death of a person in whose favor or against whom a right of action has accrued for any cause prior to his death, the right of action survives in favor of or against the legal representative of the deceased. In tort actions for personal injuries, the right of action is limited to damages for physical injury, excluding pain and suffering resulting therefrom.””
2 later decisions 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.