Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 297 F.2d 411 - Edna Fall, as Administratrix of the Estate of Phillip Fall, Deceased v. Esso Standard Oil Company

Edna Fall, as Administratrix of the Estate of Phillip Fall, Deceased v. Esso Standard Oil Company’s Empirical Analysis

297 F.2d 411 · 1962

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
April 2014
most recently cited

43 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2014 · most notably Gillespie v. United States Steel Corp. (1964), United States v. Brown (1973)

43 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

380196219701980199020002010decided

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 Cortes v. Baltimore Insular Line, Inc. · Kernan v. American Dredging Co. · Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co. · Michalic v. Cleveland Tankers, Inc. · The M/v 'Tungus' v. Skovgaard E

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

  1. “A useful tool may be a dangerous weapon. Lizzie Borden took an axe. A weapon may be a useful tool. The trial judge cleaned fish with his switchblade knife. But an axe belongs in a tool shed; a seaman cannot bring one aboard ship. A switchblade knife may be appropriate in a fishing box; a messman cannot lawfully bring one aboard ship and, in this case, making matters worse, keep it on a table near his bunk, presumably for instant use.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Because of the dual nature of certain instruments as tools and weapons, the determination of the character of the instrument for purposes of the litigation is usually one for the jury.””
    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.