Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 296 MASS 448 - Caira v. Caira

Caira v. Caira’s Empirical Analysis

1937

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
8
states following
September 1986
most recently cited

2 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 1986 · most notably Warner v. Leder (1952), Clark v. M. W. Leahy Co. (1938)

2 district · 29 state decisions

130193719401950196019701980decided

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 Donovan's Case · Bresnahan v. Barre · Ballou v. Fitzpatrick · McDonald v. Employers' Liability Assurance Corp. · Higgins's Case

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

  1. ““The plaintiff’s intestate was injured by the tort of the defendant committed while each was acting within the scope of his employment by the common employer. The employer was required by accepting the Workmen’s Compensation Act to protect the plaintiff’s intestate from the consequences of such conduct by the defendant. It was then an incident to the employment of both the plaintiff’s intestate and the defendant that there should be protection against such injury by the insurance of the employer under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. * * “One purpose of the Workmen’s Compensation Act was to sweep within its provisions all claims for compensation flowing from personal injuries arising out of and in the course of employment by a common employer insured under the act, and not to preserve for the benefit of the insurer or of the insurer and those injured liabilities between those engaged in the common employment which but for the act would exist at common law. That is the broad ground underlying the decisions already cited. It is equally applicable to the case at bar. An individual employee stands on the same footing with respect to such liability as a contractor or subcontractor.””
    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.