Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 67 F.1d 219 - Rouse v. Hornsby

Rouse v. Hornsby’s Empirical Analysis

67 F. 219 · 1895

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
April 1970
most recently cited

4 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1970

4 federal appellate ·

20189519001910192019301940195019601970decided

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.

Appellate journey

Relationships

Relies on St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co. v. Needham · Hornsby v. Eddy

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

  1. “The time will probably never come when a collision resulting from an attempt to have two trains going at full speed, in opposite directions, pass each other on the same track, will not be held to be negligence, in law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the intervening petition set up a cause of action exclusively cognizable at law, and was tried by a jury as such.”
    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.