Fischer v. S/Y Neraida’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. “[1] that the allision was the fault of the stationary object[;][2] that the moving vessel acted with reasonable care[;] or [3] that the allision was an unavoidable accident.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Combo Maritime, Inc. v. U.S. United Bulk Terminal, LLC · Hatt 65, LLC v. Kreitzberg

2. “The defendant can demonstrate: "[1] that the allision was the fault of the stationary object[;][2] that the moving vessel acted with reasonable care[;] or [3] that the allision was an unavoidable accident." [ Bunge Corp. v.]Freeport Marine Repair, 240 F.3d [919] at 923 [11th Cir.2001]. These three defenses might be analogized to the common law tort arguments of contributory negligence, denial of negligence, and superceding causation, respectively. Each independent argument, if sustained, is sufficient to defeat liability.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re the Complaint of Atlantic Marine, Property Holding Co. · 570 F. Supp. 2d 1363 - In Re Matter of Complaint of Atlantic Marine Prop.

3. “The appropriate standard of care in this regime is based upon (1) general concepts of prudent seamanship and reasonable care; (2) statutory and regulatory rules ...; and (3) recognized customs and usages.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re the Complaint of Atlantic Marine, Property Holding Co. · 570 F. Supp. 2d 1363 - In Re Matter of Complaint of Atlantic Marine Prop.