Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 263 F.1d 369 - The Santa Barbara

The Santa Barbara’s Empirical Analysis

263 F. 369 · 1920

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
February 1959
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1959

4 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions

701920193019401950decided

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 The Osceola · John A. Roebling's Sons Co. of New York v. Erickson · Hanrahan v. Pacific Transport Co. · The Santa Barbara

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

  1. ““The chains were supplied; whether unseaworthiness would have resulted, had that not been done, is a matter not before us. Whether they should be ‘maintained,’ or retained in the pulleys, and left stretched along the guys, contributing weight without strength, while the steamer tossed at sea, is a matter wholly within the discretion of the captain. If that discretion was unwisely exercised, it was at most no more than his personal negligence" in handling or mishandling good and proper appliances duly furnished by the owners. As nothing was defective in lit or material, and everything suggested as proper, oven by libelant’s proctor, was provided for the ship, we hold that no unseaworthiness was shown."””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.