Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation v. The Mobile Drilling Barge or Vessel Known as Mr. Charlie Etc., Signal Oil & Gas Company, Third-Party v. Ocean Drilling & Exploration Company, Third-Party Claimant-Appellee, Forestoil Corporation, Third-Party’s Empirical Analysis
424 F.2d 684 · 1970
Citation profile
51 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) v. National Labor Relations Board (1972), M/V American Queen v. San Diego Marine Contruction Corp. (1983)
51 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions
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 Ryan Stevedoring Co. v. Pan-Atlantic Steamship Corp. · Weyerhaeuser Steamship Co. v. Nacirema Operating Co. · United States v. Seckinger · Halcyon Lines v. Haenn Ship Ceiling & Refitting Corp. · Rodriquez 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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Although in Batson-Cook [Batson-Cook Company v. Industrial Steel Erectors, 5 Cir., 257 F.2d 410 ] the indemnitor was not negligent and the damage was caused solely by the negligence of the indemnitee, the rule requiring specificity of the intent to indemnify for the indemnitee's own negligence is equally applicable in situations where, as here, the concurring negligence of the indemnitee and indemnitor causes the damage. See United States v. Seckinger, 5 Cir. 1969, 408 F.2d 146 , reversed on other grounds 397 U.S. 203 , 90 S.Ct. 880 , 25 L.Ed.2d 224 (October 13, 1969)."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]hile it need not be done in any particular language or form, unless the intention is unequivocally expressed in the plainest of words, the law will consider that the parties did not undertake to indemnify one against the consequences of his own negligence. 257 F.2d at 412.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]t is inconceivable to us that a lease operator can plan a drilling site in total disregard of the rights of owners of underground pipe lines. All the pertinent information as to the existence and location of the lines was both in SIGNAL’S hands and easily available as a matter of public information. We need not decide to what extent a lease operator must go to fulfill its duties to innocent third parties like TRANSCO because SIGNAL took no steps whatever. Even assuming the duty not to hit the pipe lines is dele-gable, SIGNAL did not delegate to ODE-CO in the Drilling and Rework Contract the responsibility of ascertaining the existence and location of submerged pipe lines. SIGNAL did not even put ODECO on notice that it had made no check for the existence of underwater obstructions or submerged pipe lines.”
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.