Johnson & Johnson v. Chief Freight Lines Co.’s Empirical Analysis
679 F.2d 421 · 1982
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently September 2009
7 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
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
Applies 49 U.S.C. § 101 (Independent Safety Board Act) · 49 U.S.C. § 11707
Relies on Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Elmore & Stahl · Dublin Co. v. Rydek Truck Lines, Inc.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The issuance of a bill of lading acknowledges receipt of the goods as described in the bill and further states that the goods were in apparent good order... .This maybe characterized as an admission by the carrier that on the surface from ordinary inspection the goods were received in good order. That admission is sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the carrier that the goods were in fact delivered in a good condition [emphasis supplied].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““[t]he issuance of a bill of lading acknowledges receipt of the goods as described in the bill and further states that the goods were in apparent good order unless otherwise noted ... [and] is sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the carrier that the goods were in fact delivered in a good condition.””
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.