Nathaniel Waring v. Thomas Clarke’s Empirical Analysis
46 U.S. 441 · 1847
Citation profile
59 federal appellate · 31 district · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 270 later decisions (57 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2022 · most notably Crowell v. Benson (1932), Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg (1989)
59 federal appellate · 31 district · 19 state decisions — followed in 11 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 The General Smith · The St. Jago de Cuba · United States v. Bevans · The United States v. Lawrence Coombs
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.
““In respect to the clause in the ninth section of the Judiciary Act —‘saving and reserving to suitors in all cases a common law remedy where the common law is competent to give it’ — we remark, its meaning is, that in cases of concurrent jurisdiction in admiralty and common law, the jurisdiction in the latter is not taken away. The saving is for the benefit of suitors, plaintiff and defendant, when the plaintiff in a case of concurrent jurisdiction chooses to sue in the common law courts, so giving to himself and the defendant all the advantages which such tribunals can give to suitors in them.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“will be held responsible for all losses until it is proved that the collision was not the consequence [of a statutory fault]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Trinidad Corporation, Plaintiff-Counterclaim v. S.S. Keiyoh Maru, in Rem, Sol Gloriosa Maritima, S.A., a Corporation, Defendant-Counterclaimant v. S.S. Fort Worth, in Rem, Her Engines, Tackle, Appurtenances, Apparel, Furnishings and Equipment, Defendant-Third-Party-Plaintiff-Appellee · Trinidad Corporation v. Ss Keiyoh Maru Sol Gloriosa Maritima Sa“all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction”
2 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.