Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 41 F.1d 61 - McPhail v. Williams

McPhail v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

41 F. 61 · 1890

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
October 1938
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 5 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently October 1938

3 federal appellate · 5 district ·

4018901900191019201930decided

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 Butler v. Boston & Savannah Steamship Co. · Harbinger v. Carver

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

  1. ““It seems to have been intended as explanatory of the intent of congress in this class of legislation. * * •* The language is somewhat vague, it is true, but it is possible that it was intended to remove all doubts of the application of the limited liability law to all cases of loss and injury caused without the privity or knowledge of the owner.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Sec. 18. That the individual liability of a shipowner, shall be limited to the proportion of any or all debts and liabilities that his individual share of the vessel bears to the whole; and the aggregate liabilities of all the owners of a vessel on account of the same shall not exceed the value of such vessels and freight pending.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Nor, shall the same apply to wages due to persons employed by said ship-owners.””
    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.