Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 309 F.2d 553 - Pearson v. Northeast Airlines, Inc.

Pearson v. Northeast Airlines, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

309 F.2d 553 · 1962

Citation profile

97
cited by 97 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
13
states following
May 2013
most recently cited

42 federal appellate · 6 district · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 97 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2013 · most notably Van Dusen v. Barrack (1964), 67 Cal. 2d 551 - Reich v. Purcell (1967)

42 federal appellate · 6 district · 19 state decisions — followed in 13 states

610196219701980199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 46

Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Richards v. United States · The Harrisburg · Chesapeake Ohio Railway Company v. Addie Kelly

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

  1. “[A] state with substantial ties to a transaction in dispute has a legitimate constitutional interest in the application of its own rules of law. If, indeed, those connections are wholly lacking or at best tenuous, then it may be proper to conclude that the state has exceeded its constitutional power in applying its local law. See, e.g., Home Insurance Co. v. Dick, 281 U.S. 397 , 50 S.Ct. 338 , 74 L.Ed. 926 (1930); Currie, “The Constitution and the Choice of Law: Governmental Interests and the Judicial Function,” 26 U.Chi. L.Rev. 9, 75 (1958).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Damages for death by negligence of common carrier. If the proprietor of a common carrier of passengers * * * causes the death of a passenger, he or it shall be liable in damages in the sum of not less than two thousand nor more than fifteen thousand dollars, to be assessed with reference to the degree of culpability of the defendant or of his or its servants or agents, and recovered and distributed as provided in section one, and to the use of the persons and in the proportions, therein specified.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““Our view of a State’s power to adopt an appropriate conflict-of-laws doctrine in a situation touching more than one place has been indicated by our discussion in Part III of this opinion. Where more than one State has sufficiently substantial contact with the activity in question, the forum State, by analysis of the interests possessed by the States involved, could constitutionally apply to the decision of the case the law of one or another state having such an interest in the multistate activity. * * * a”
    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.