Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 262 U.S. 499 - Madera Sugar Pine Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission

Madera Sugar Pine Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission’s Empirical Analysis

262 U.S. 499 · 1923

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
7
cited 7 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
May 1993
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1993 · most notably Crowell v. Benson (1932), Cudahy Packing Co of Nebraska v. Parramore (1923)

4 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

17019231930194019501960197019801990decided

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 New York Central Railroad Company v. Sarah White · Mountain Timber Company v. State of Washington · Arizona Employers' Liability Cases · Western Indemnity Co. v. Pillsbury · Western Metal Supply Co. v. Pillsbury

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

  1. “"[T]he two kinds of payment are `always regarded as component parts of a single system of rights and liabilities arising out of' the relation of employer and employee. [Citation omitted.] The object of such acts `is single — to provide for the liability of the employer to make compensation for injuries received by an employee,' whether to the employee himself or to those who suffer pecuniary loss by reason of his death. [Citation omitted.]" Madera Co., 262 U.S. at 501 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Such employers' liability statutes are designed to benefit all employees. [Citation omitted.] They have the interest of the employees in mind and are primarily for the protection of their lives; the action is given to the beneficiaries on their account, and they are not intended to be less protected if their beneficiaries happen to live abroad.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “to those to whom the employee would have naturally have made such insurance payable: to himself, although an alien, if he be disabled; and to those dependent upon his earnings for support, if he be killed.”
    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.