The Granite State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

49 federal appellate · 45 district · 4 state decisions

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

1. ““ * * * we are not called upon to inquire wherein the steamboat was not managed with proper nautical skill; whether the bright light which the steamboat had, or ought to have had, was not sufficient to warn her in time of her proximity to the pier if careful watch had been kept; whether she should not have backed her engine instead of rushing forward ; whether she should have ported or starboarded her helm. All these inquiries are superfluous where the collision was caused by a vessel having the power to move or stop at pleasure in a channel of sufficient breadth, without any superior force compelling her to the place of collision. The fact that in these circumstances the steamboat did collide with the barge is conclusive evidence that she was not properly managed, and that she- should be condemned to pay the damages caused by the collision.” 3 Wall, at page 314, 70 U.S. at page 314 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Denty v. The Martin Dallman · 161 F. Supp. 136 - Pennsylvania Railroad Co. v. the SS Beatrice

2. ““There cannot he an established market value for barges, boats, and other articles of that description, as in cases of grain, cotton, or stock.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Metropolitan S. S. Co. v. Vanderbilt · Alaska S. S. Co. v. Inland Navigation Co.

3. ““The commissioner fixed the value of the barge at $850, assuming apparently that she was worth this sum to her owners; though he stated that having been built for a special and unusual purpose, and being, unlike every other sort of craft! used in the port of New York, he had difficulty in forming any estimate. The difficulty, in truth, was obvious; some witnesses swearing that the boat was not worth having for a gift, others that she was worth $8 or $10, and others that in her former condition she could be made practically very useful. There was conflict in the testimony here as in the other part of the case. This report was set aside, and a new estimate directed. On new evidence the commissioner gave $150 more. This report, too, was set aside, and a third reference ordered; the court directing the commissioner to consider the actual cost of raising and repairing the barge and so putting her as near as could be into her former state. A report made on this basis was confirmed.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Alaska S. S. Co. v. Inland Navigation Co.