Boatman v. Miles’s Empirical Analysis
1921
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently October 1998
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 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 Kennon v. Gilmer · Miller & Lux v. Madera Canal & Irrigation Co. · Rase v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. · Streeter v. Western Wheeled Scraper Co. · Worden v. Gore-Meenan Co.
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"... When it appears to be clear that the servant had knowledge of, and appreciated the danger, or that the danger was so obvious or apparent that knowledge should be imputed to him, then the court may declare as a matter of law that the servant is not entitled to recover, as was done in the following cases ... (citations). If, on the other hand, there is a conflict in the evidence, or different inferences may be drawn therefrom, the question of knowledge is for the jury. (citations)" [Emphasis supplied] Boatman, supra, 199 P. at 936 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brittain v. Booth“"... [W]e may state generally that a servant assumes (1) such dangers as are ordinarily and normally incident to his occupation, and a workman of mature years is presumed to know them, whether he does or not; (2) such extraordinary or abnormal risks which he (a) knows and appreciates and faces without complaint, or which (b) are obvious or apparent...."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brittain v. Booth““ * * * the only question argued is that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence, for the reason that it appears that the appellee had just as much knowledge of the vicious character of the stallion as appellant, and for that reason assumed, as a matter of law, the risk of his employment, and that the injury was the result of his own fault.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCarthy v. Croker
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.