Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 63 S.C. 559 - Hicks v. Southern Ry.

Hicks v. Southern Ry.’s Empirical Analysis

1902

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
November 1957
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 1957

1 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

60190219101920193019401950decided

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.

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.

  1. “We see no reason why it should not be prima facie evidence of negligence, to employ an incompetent servant, as well as to furnish defective machinery. Nor do we see why a servant should be held to assume the risk of negligence on the part of an incompetent fellow-servant, when he does not assume the risk arising from defective machinery, especially, since it has been decided that the word appliances includes the persons necessary to operate the machinery.”
    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.