Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 606 F.2d 515 - Beard v. Shell Oil Co.

Beard v. Shell Oil Co.’s Empirical Analysis

606 F.2d 515 · 1979

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
3
states following
January 2013
most recently cited

24 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently January 2013 · most notably Jethro Barrett v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., E.B.B. Co., Inc. And Lift Barge, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Company, Intervenor-Appellant (1986), Longmire v. Sea Drilling Corp. (1980)

24 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

30019791980199020002010decided

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 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Offshore Company and the Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York, Appellants v. Johnie M. Robison, Appellee-Appellant. Robison v. Offshore Company and the Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York · Knight v. United States · Davis v. Hill Engineering, Inc. · Irish Northern Aid Committee v. Attorney General of the United States

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

  1. “(1) [has] a more or less permanent connection with (2) a vessel in navigation and (3) the capacity in which he is employed or the duties which he performs must contribute to the function of the vessel, the accomplishment of its mission or its operation or welfare in terms of its maintenance during its movement or during anchorage for its future trips.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(a) court ... may, in the proper case, hold that there is no reasonable evidentiary basis to support a jury finding that an injured person is a seaman ... under the Jones Act.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “where the only rational inference to be drawn from the evidence is that the worker is not a seaman.”
    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.