Dickinson v. Stiles’s Empirical Analysis
246 U.S. 631 · 1918
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 9 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2014 · most notably Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Liepelt (1980), Croce v. Bromley Corp. (1980)
23 federal appellate · 9 district · 12 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedHolloway v. Dickinson
Relationships
Relies on Minneapolis St Louis Railroad Company v. George Bombolis · Charleston Western Carolina Railway Company v. Varnville Furniture Company · Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Harris · Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Stewart
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[C]ases that declare that the acts of Congress supersede all state legislation on the subject of the liability of railroad companies to their [employees] have nothing to do with the matter. The Minnesota statute does not meddle with that. It affects neither the amount recovered nor the persons by whom it is recovered, nor again the principles of distribution. It deals only with a necessary expense of recovery. Congress cannot have contemplated that the claims to which its action gave rise or power would be paid in all cases without litigation, or that suits would be tried by lawyers for nothing, yet it did not regulate attorney’s fees. It contemplated suits in state courts and accepted state procedure in advance. We see no reason why it should be supposed to have excluded ordinary incidents of state procedure.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * The whole case is simply that the State allows the attorney employed to collect a claim to be subro-gated to the rights of the claimant so far as to secure the attorney’s fees. We see no reason why it should not.””
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.