Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 62 U.S. 202 - The Philadelphia Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad Company v. Philip Quigley

The Philadelphia Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad Company v. Philip Quigley’s Empirical Analysis

62 U.S. 202 · 1858

Citation profile

188
cited by 188 later decisions
27
cited 27 times by the Supreme Court
27
states following
June 2021
most recently cited

48 federal appellate · 8 district · 79 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 188 later decisions (27 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2021 · most notably Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp. (1949), Smith v. Wade (1983)

48 federal appellate · 8 district · 79 state decisions — followed in 27 states

310185818601870188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 The President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States v. Dandridge · Alexander Marshall v. The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company · Bank of the United States v. Deveaux · John Conard v. The Atlantic Insurance Company New York · White v. Nicholls

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

  1. ““Whenever the injury complained of has born inflicted maliciously or wantonly, and with circumstances of contumely or indignity, the jury are not limited to the ascertainment of a simple compensation for the wrong committed against the aggrieved person. But the malice spoken of in this rule is not merely the doing of an unlawful or, injurious act. The word implies that the act complained of was conceived in the spirit of mischief, or of criminal indifference to civil obligations.””
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[F]or acts done by the agents of a corporation, either in contractu or in delicto, in the course of its business, and of their employment, the corporation is responsible, as an individual is responsible under similar circumstances. At a very early period, it was decided in Great Britain, as well as in the United States, that actions might be maintained against corporations for torts; and instances may be found, in the judicial annals of both countries, suits for torts arising from the acts of their agents, of nearly every variety.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““(2) And if tbe jury find for the plaintiff under the first instruction they are not restricted, in giving damages, to the actual positive injury sustained by the plaintiff, but may give such exemplary damages, if any, as, in tneir opinion, are called for and justified, in view of all the circumstances in this ease, to render reparation to plaintiff, and act as an adequate punishment to the defendant.””
    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.