Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 286 U.S. 145 - Bradford Elec. Light Co. v. Clapper

Bradford Elec. Light Co. v. Clapper’s Empirical Analysis

286 U.S. 145 · 1932

Citation profile

535
cited by 535 later decisions
74
cited 74 times by the Supreme Court
38
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

126 federal appellate · 24 district · 225 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 535 later decisions (74 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2016 · most notably Williams v. State of North Carolina (1942), Angel v. Bullington (1947)

126 federal appellate · 24 district · 225 state decisions — followed in 38 states

1240193219401950196019701980199020002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedBradford Electric Light Co. v. Clapper (from First Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on New York Central Railroad Company v. Sarah White · Allgeyer v. State of Louisiana · Cudahy Packing Co of Nebraska v. Parramore · Home Ins Co v. Dick · Mountain Timber Company v. State of Washington

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

  1. “[T]he company is in a position different from that of a plaintiff who seeks to enforce a cause of action conferred by the laws of another state. The right which it claims should be given effect is set up by way of defense to an asserted liability; and to a defense different considerations apply. A state may, on occasion, decline to enforce a foreign cause of action. In so doing, it merely denies a remedy leaving unimpaired the plaintiffs substantive right, so that he is free to enforce it elsewhere. But to refuse to give effect to a substantive defense under the applicable law of another state, as under the circumstances here presented, subjects the defendant to irremediable liability. This may not be done.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Even if Mr. Olson had not been covered by North Dakota Workmen’s Compensation,[ 1 ] i would reach the same result under the provisions of the Full Faith and Credit Clause, Article IV, § 1 of the United States Constitution, which provides as follows: “ ‘Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.’”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “not only for employees a remedy which is both expeditious and independent of proof of fault, but also for employers a liability which is limited and determinative.”
    5 later decisions 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.