Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co.’s Empirical Analysis
280 F.2d 110 · 1960
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 5 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently May 2002 · most notably Robert W. Johnston v. H. G. Cartwright, Kiowa Corporation, Walter Brown and H. G. Cartwright v. Robert W. Johnston (1966), Hysell v. Iowa Public Service Co. (1976)
24 federal appellate · 5 district · 11 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 Carter v. Atlanta & St. Andrews Bay Railway Co. · Jamieson v. Woodward · Best v. Yerkes · Waylander-Peterson Co. v. Great Northern Ry. Co. · Jacobson v. New York, N. H. & H. R. 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * Both actions [for indemnity and contribution] are premised on a finding that two or more parties have been guilty of actionable wrong thereby bringing injury or damage to some third person. * * * * * * * * * "* * * The essence of the action for contribution is common liability to the injured person, not liability for common negligence, or similar negligence, or like negligence. Simply stated, common liability means that each party, by reason of his wrongful act, is made legally liable to respond in damages to the injured party. Absent such liability on the part of the person from whom indemnity or contribution is sought, how can it be said, in evoking the equitable remedy, that the one seeking relief has borne an unfair share of the loss for which all are liable?”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We are unable to detect any language therein which, even by inference, could be construed as constituting a waiver of, or bar to, the legal right of one railroad member to seek indemnity or contribution from another member. There is no reference of any kind in the rules to indemnity or contribution. In our view, the rules are solely designed to govern the care and maintenance of cars belonging to one carrier while in possession of another.” 280 F.2d at 113 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The right to indemnity, or contribution, presupposes actionable negligence of both parties, toward a third person.”
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.