Horn v. Baltimore’s Empirical Analysis
54 F. 301 · 1893
Citation profile
15 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently August 1962
15 federal appellate ·
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 Railroad Company v. Houston · Schofield v. Chicago M St P Ry Co · Haas v. Grand Rapids & Indiana Railroad · Klanowski v. Grand Trunk Railway Co. · Gilman v. D. V. R.
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In the very nature of things, their affirmative testimony that the warning was given must be accented as proof of that fact, notwithstanding an equal or greater number of witnesses failed to notice it, from whatever cause. There is in such cases no conilict of evidence as to the matter in question. The observation of the fact by some is entirely consistent with the failure of others to observe it, or their forgetfulness of its occurrence.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The company in whose employ such engineer or person in charge of an engine is, as well as the person himself, shall be liable in damages to any person or company injured in person or property by such neglect or act of such engineer or person.””
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.