Bournias v. Atlantic Maritime Co.’s Empirical Analysis
220 F.2d 152 · 1955
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 8 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 96 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2018 · most notably Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson (1971), Conte v. Flota Mercante Del Estado (1960)
34 federal appellate · 8 district · 8 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
Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Guaranty Trust Co. v. York · Guaranty Trust Co. v. York · The Harrisburg · Western Fuel Co. v. Garcia
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 96 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“directed to the newly created liability so specifically as to warrant saying that it qualifie[s] the right”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Adolph Benjamin Sokolowski Rosemarie Sokolowski Adolph Benjamin Sokolowski, Father, Next Friend, and Natural Guardian of Laura Sokolowski, a Minor Adolph Benjamin Sokolowski, Father, Next Friend, and Natural Guardian of Anthony Sokolowski, a Minor and Adolph Benjamin Sokolowski and Rosemarie Sokolowski, Jointly as Husband and Wife v. Joseph Flanzer, Esquire, of the Estate of Josephine D. Gagnon, and James I. Taliaferro, Jr. And Smithfield Packing Company, Adolph Benjamin Sokolowski Rosemarie Sokolowski Adolph Benjamin Sokolowski, Father, Next Friend, and Natural Guardian of Laura Sokolowski, Father, and Next Friend, and Natural Guardian of Anthony Sokolowski, a Minor and Adolph Benjamin Sokolowski and Rosemarie Sokolowski, Jointly as Husband and Wife v. Joseph Flanzer, Esquire, of the Estate of Josephine D. Gagnon James I. Taliaferro, Jr. And Smithfield Packing Company · 245 F. Supp. 195 - Lewis v. FOOD MACHINERY AND CHEMICAL CORP., JOHN BEAN DIV.““The general rule appears established that for the purpose of deciding whether to apply local law or foreign law, statutes of limitations are classified as ‘procedural.’ Stumberg, Conflict of Laws 147 (1951); Lorenzen, Statutes of Limitation and the Conflict of Laws, 28 Yale L.J. 492 (1919). Hence the law of the forum controls. See Order of United Commercial Travelers v. Wolfe, 1947, 331 U.S. 586, 607 , 67 S.Ct. 1355 , 91 L.Ed. 1687 ; Janes v. Sackman Bros. Co., 2d Cir., 1949, 177 F.2d 928 . This rule has been criticized as inconsistent with the rationale expressed above, since the foreign statute, unlike evidentiary and procedural details, is generally readily discovered and applied, and a difference in periods of limitation would often be expected to influence the choice of forum. Lorenzen, supra; Stumberg, op. cit., supra. The rule is in fact an accident of history. Lorenzen, supra; see also Developments in the Law—Statutes of Limitations, 63 Harv.L.Rev. 1177, 1187 (1950). And although it may perhaps be explained as a device for giving effect to strong local policies on limitations, this explanation would not satisfy the objections of its critics. Lorenzen, supra. Be all this as it may, this general rule is firmly embedded in our law.” 220 F.2d at 154 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]n actions where the rights of parties are grounded on the laws of jurisdictions other than the forum, 'it is a well-settled conflict-of-laws rule that the forum will apply the foreign substantive law, but will follow its own rules of procedure.' Thus, plaintiff's assertion that the rules of the civil law countries do not recognize the Real Party in Interest doctrine is irrelevant here. I will therefore continue to apply Rule 17(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”
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.