Hall Long v. The Railroad Companies’s Empirical Analysis
80 U.S. 367 · 1871
Citation profile
42 federal appellate · 42 district · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 196 later decisions (38 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2013 · most notably United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (1949), Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Elmore & Stahl (1964)
42 federal appellate · 42 district · 38 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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
Relies on Philip v. Nock
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 196 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is ioo well settled by tlie authorities to admit of question that, as between a common carrier of goods and an underwriter upon them, the liability to the owner for their loss or destruction is primarily upon the carrier. while the liability of the insurer is only secondary. * * * Hence it has often been ruled that an insurer who has paid a loss may use the name of the assured in an action to obtain redress from the carrier whose failure of duty caused the loss. It is conceded that this doctrine prevails in cases of marine insurance/’”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““There is, then, no reason for the subrogation of insurers, by marine policies, to the rights of the assured against a carrier by sea which does not exist in support of a like subrogation in case of an-insurance against fire on land. Nor do the authorities make any distinction between the cases, though a carrier may, by stipulation with the owner of the goods, obtain the benefit of insurance. ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * The general rule is well established that an underwriter who has paid a loss is entitled to recover what he has paid by a suit in the name of the assured against the carrier who caused the loss. Hall & Long v. The Railroad Companies, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 367 , 20 L.Ed. 594 ; The Potomac, 105 U.S. 630 , 26 L.Ed. 1194 ; The Fort Gaines (D.C.) 24 F. (2d) 849.””
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.