Stanislawski v. Upper River Services, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
6 F.3d 537 · 1993
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently October 2010
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
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
Applies 46 U.S.C. § 30104 (Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (Jones Act))
Relies on Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Calmar Ss Corporation v. Taylor · Brister v. A.W.I., Inc. · Clark v. Burlington Northern, Inc. · Associated Electric Cooperative Inc v. Mid-America Transportation Company Barge Mat-704
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“maintenance and cure” under admiralty law is not related to a finding of negligence under the Jones Act.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[p]ast wage loss is a proper component of Jones Act damages and thus, should be deducted from the net judgment, after the judgment has been reduced to account for [plaintiff's] negligence,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Thus, a seaman is entitled to maintenance and cure payments in addition to any damages for negligence he or she might win under the Jones Act.”
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.