Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co. v. McKibbin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

171 federal appellate · 141 district · 205 state decisions

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

1. ““A foreign corporation is amenable to process to enforce a personal liability, in the absence of consent, only if it is doing business within the state in such manner and to such extent as to warrant the inference that it is present there.””

   26 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Knapp v. Bullock Tractor Co. · Nickels v. Pullman Co.

2. ““Obviously the sale by a local carrier of through tickets does not involve a doing of business within the state by each of the connecting carriers. If it did, nearly every railroad company in the country would be ‘doing business’ in every state. Even hiring an office, the employment by a foreign railroad of a ‘district freight and passenger agent * * * to solicit and procure passengers and freight to be transported over the defendant’s line,’ and having under his direction ‘several clerks and various traveling passenger and freight agents,’ was held not to constitute ‘doing business within the state.’ Green v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 205 U.S. 530 , 27 S.Ct. 595 , 51 L.Ed. 916 .””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. McManus v. Capital Airlines, Inc. · Kenny v. Alaska Airlines, Inc.

3. ““No part of the Philadelphia & Reading’s railroad is situated within the state of New York. It has no dock, or freight or passenger ticket office or any other office or any agent or property therein. Like other railroads distant from New York, it sends into that state, over connecting carriers, loaded freight cars, shipped by other persons, which cars are, in course of time, returned. The carriage within that state is performed wholly by such connecting carriers, which receive that portion of the entire compensation paid by the shipper therefor; and the Philadelphia & Reading receives only that portion of the compensation payable for the haul over its own line. The Central Railroad of New Jersey is such a connecting carrier, and has a ferry terminal at the foot of West 23rd St., New York City. It issues there the customary coupon tickets over its own and connecting lines, including the Philadelphia & Reading and the Baltimore & Ohio. The whole ticket, in each case, is issued by the Central Railroad of New Jersey; and each coupon so recites. In these tickets there is a separate coupon for the journey over each of the connecting railroads; and the coupon for the journey over each such railroad bears also its name. Each coupon is declared thereon to be ‘void if detached.’ The Philadelphia & Reading receives in ultimate accounting between the carriers, that portion of the fare which is paid for the journey over its own line. Passengers for points on the Philadelphia & Reading or ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 121 Ind. App. 440 - Travis v. Fuqua