Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 517 F.2d 404 - Imperial Commodities Corp. v. Grace Line Inc.

Imperial Commodities Corp. v. Grace Line Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

517 F.2d 404 · 1975

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
1
states following
March 1998
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently March 1998

11 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

100197519801990decided

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 McAllister v. United States · Glidden Company v. Zdanok Et Al. · In Re Disbarment of Isserman · Rogers v. Loether · May v. Hamburg-Amerikanische Packetfahrt Aktiengesellschaft

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

  1. ““(1) The carrier shall be bound, before and at the beginning of the voyage, to exercise due diligence to— (a) Make the ship seaworthy; . .””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““(1) Neither the carrier nor the ship shall be liable for loss or damage arising or resulting from unseaworthiness unless caused by want of due diligence on the part of the carrier to make the ship seaworthy, and to secure that the ship is properly manned, equipped, and supplied, . Whenever loss or damage has resulted from unseaworthiness, the burden of proving the exercise of due diligence shall be on the carrier or other persons claiming exemption under this section.””
    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.