Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 684 F.2d 266 - Walker v. Sun Ship, Inc.

Walker v. Sun Ship, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

684 F.2d 266 · 1982

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
March 2011
most recently cited

5 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently March 2011

5 federal appellate ·

501982199020002010decided

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 33 U.S.C. § 901 · 33 U.S.C. § 912

Relies on Link v. Wabash Railroad · Shoup Voting Machine Corp. v. Datamedia Computer Service, Inc. · Pillsbury v. United Engineering Co. · Kushner v. Winterthur Swiss Insurance · Sun Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. Bowman

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

  1. “Petitioner voluntarily chose this attorney as his representative in this action and he cannot now avoid the consequences of the acts of omissions of this freely selected agent. Any other notion would be wholly inconsistent with our system of representative litigation in which each party is deemed bound by the acts of his lawyer-agent and is considered to have “notice of all facts, notice of which can be charged upon the attorney.””
    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.