Brady v. Terminal Railroad’s Empirical Analysis
303 U.S. 10 · 1938
Citation profile
87 federal appellate · 18 district · 88 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 270 later decisions (27 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2020 · most notably Urie v. Thompson (1949), Kernan v. American Dredging Co. (1958)
87 federal appellate · 18 district · 88 state decisions — followed in 16 states
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 Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co. · St Louis Iron Mountain Southern Railway Company v. May Taylor W · Southern Railway Company v. United States · Chicago Burlington Quincy Railway Company v. United States
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 270 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * [It] had been brought into the yard * * * and placed on a receiving track temporarily pending the continuance of transportation. If not found to be defective, it would proceed to destination; if found defective, it would be subject to removal for repairs. It is not a case where a defective car has reached a place of repair. See Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. Hooven, 6 Cir., 297 F. 919, 921, 923; New York, C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Kelly, 7 Cir., 70 F.2d 548, 551. The car in this instance had not been withdrawn from use. Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co., 196 U.S. 1 , 21, 22 [25 S.Ct. 158, 49 L.Ed. 363]; Delk v. St. Louis & San Francisco R. Co., 220 U.S. 580 , 584-586 [31 S.Ct. 617, 55 L.Ed. 590]; Great Northern Railway Co. v. Otos, 239 U.S. 349 , 351 [36 S.Ct. 124, 60 L.Ed. 322]; Chicago Great Western R. Co. v. Schendel [ 267 U.S. 287 , 45 S.Ct. 303, 69 L.Ed. 614], supra. The car was still in use, though motionless. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Rwy. Co. v. Goneau, 269 U.S. 406 [46 S.Ct. 129, 70 L.Ed. 335].”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The statutory liability is not based upon the carrier's negligence. The duty imposed is an absolute one, and the carrier is not excused by any showing of care, however assiduous.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“« ⅜ * * ajso that the statutory liability imposed by the Safety Appliance Act is not based upon the carrier’s negligence but on an absolute duty and the carrier is not excused by any showing of care however assiduous. * * * The statute 'has been liberally construed’ so as to give a right of recovery for every injury, the proximate cause of which was a failure to comply with a requirement of the Act.””
3 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.