Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 79 MINN 245 - Weisel v. Eastern Railway Co.

Weisel v. Eastern Railway Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1900

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
May 1909
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Johnson v. St. Paul & Duluth Railroad · Lavallee v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co. · Pearson v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.

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

  1. ““The defendant ought not to be required to anticipate that so unusual and peculiar a combination of circumstances would occur as to occasion so extraordinary and unexpected an accident from such a commonplace and ordinarily simple cause.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.