Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 64 U.S. 209 - The Philadelphia Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad Company v. The Philadelphia and Havre De Grace Steam Towboat Company

The Philadelphia Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad Company v. The Philadelphia and Havre De Grace Steam Towboat Company’s Empirical Analysis

64 U.S. 209 · 1859

Citation profile

203
cited by 203 later decisions
28
cited 28 times by the Supreme Court
17
states following
February 2011
most recently cited

50 federal appellate · 41 district · 34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 203 later decisions (28 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2011 · most notably Executive Jet Aviation, Inc. v. City of Cleveland (1972), Kermarec v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique (1959)

50 federal appellate · 41 district · 34 state decisions — followed in 17 states

31018591860187018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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. William Owens · Manro v. Joseph Almeida

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

  1. ““The jurisdiction of courts of admiralty, in matters of contract, depends upon the nature and character of the contract; but in torts it depends entirely on locality.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “We do not feel justified, therefore, on 'any principles of justice, equity, or of public policy, in inflicting an additional penalty of seven thousand dollars on the libellants, by way of set off, because their servants may have been subject to a penalty of twenty shillings each for the breach of the statute.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Under such circumstances, it became the duty of the [builders] to take care that all the obstructions to the navigation, which had been placed in the channel by their orders, and for the purpose of their intended erection, should be removed.”
    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.