Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd. v. Regal-Beloit Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

46 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions

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

1. “(a) A rail carrier providing transportation or service subject to the jurisdiction of the [Surface Transportation] Board under this part shall issue a receipt or bill of lading for property it receives for transportation under this part. That rail carrier and any other carrier that delivers the property and is providing transportation or service subject to the jurisdiction of the [Surface Transportation] Board under this part are liable to the person entitled to recover under the receipt or bill of lading. The liability imposed under this subsection is for the actual loss or injury to the property caused by— (1) the receiving rail carrier; (2) the delivering rail carrier; or (3) another rail carrier over whose line or route the property is transported in the United States or from a place in the United States to a place in an adjacent foreign country when transported under a through bill of lading. Failure to issue a receipt or bill of lading does not affect the liability of a rail carrier. A delivering rail carrier is deemed to be the rail carrier performing the line-haul transportation nearest the destination but does not include a rail carrier providing only a switching service at the destination. (b) The rail carrier issuing the receipt or bill of lading under subsection (a) of this section or delivering the property for which the receipt or bill of lading was issued is entitled to recover from the rail carrier over whose line or route the loss or injury occurred the amoun”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. CNA Insurance v. Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. · Chartis Seguros Mexico, S.A. de C.V. v. HLI Rail & Rigging, LLC

2. “records that a'carrier has received goods from the party that wishes to ship them, states the terms of carriage, and serves as evidence of the contract for carriage.” Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd. v. Regal-Beloit Corp., 561 U.S. 89 , 94, 130 S.Ct. 2433 , 177 L.Ed.2d 424 (2010) (quotation marks omitted). 4 .This bill -of lading was not a final bill of lading. It is marked”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. GIC Services, L.L.C. v. Freightplus USA, Inc. · Affiliated FM Ins. Co. v. Kuehne + Nagel, Inc.

3. “of the burden of searching out a particular negligent carrier from among the often numerous carriers handling an interstate shipment of goods.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Whatley v. Canadian Pac. Ry. Ltd. · Jorgensen Farms, Inc. v. Country Pride Cooperative, Inc.