Panama Co v. Vasquez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

39 federal appellate · 21 district · 77 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 218 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “the right of a common law remedy where the common law is competent to give it.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Seas Shipping Co. v. Sieracki · 228 So. 2d 365 - Ingalls Shipbuilding Corporation v. McDougald

2. “The sole question presented is whether state courts may entertain [Jones Act] actions, the defendant's contention being that they are cognizable only in the federal District Courts. [The Jones Act], as heretofore construed, changes the maritime law of the United States by giving to seamen injured through the negligence of their employers... the rights given to railway employees... by the [FELA]. And the procedural provisions therein have been construed—when read in connection with §§ 24 (third) and 256 (third) of the Judicial Code, and in light of constitutional rules respecting admiralty and maritime jurisdiction—to mean that the new substantive rights may be asserted and enforced either in actions in personam against the employers in courts administering common-law remedies, with a right of trial by jury, or in suits in admiralty in courts administering remedies in admiralty, without trial by jury; but always taking the changed maritime law as the basis and measure of the rights asserted. The sections of the Judicial Code just cited, while investing the Federal district courts with jurisdiction, "exclusive of the courts of the several states," of all "civil causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction," contain an excepting clause expressly "saving to suitors in all cases the right to a common-law remedy where the common law is competent to give it." ... [I]t uniformly has been regarded as permitting such actions to be brought in either the Federal courts or the state cour”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Peterson v. Pacific Steamship Co. · 599 So. 2d 296 - Parker v. Rowan Companies, Inc.

3. “in all civil cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 599 So. 2d 296 - Parker v. Rowan Companies, Inc. · 26 Cal. 2d 365 - Intagliata v. Shipowners & Merchants Towboat Co.