Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 82 U.S. 649 - Railroad Company v. Hanning

Railroad Company v. Hanning’s Empirical Analysis

82 U.S. 649 · 1872

Citation profile

139
cited by 139 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
16
states following
October 2022
most recently cited

46 federal appellate · 10 district · 47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 139 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2022 · most notably Meyer v. Holley (2003), Bennett v. Railroad Co. (1880)

46 federal appellate · 10 district · 47 state decisions — followed in 16 states

3001872188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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.

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

  1. “* ⅜ * Here the general management and control of the work was reserved to the company. Its extent in many particulars was not prescribed. How and in what manner the wharf was to be built was not pointed out. That, rebuilt, was to be as good as new. The new was to be of the best workmanship. This is quite indefinite and authorizes not only, but requires a great amount of care and direction on the part of the company. The submission of the whole work to the direction of the company’s engineer is evidence, ■ although not conclusive, that the company retain the management and control. The reservation of authority is both comprehensive and minute. The company have the general control, and it may prescribe where each pile shall go, where each plank shall be laid, where each stringer shall be put down, where each nail shall be driven. All the details are to be completed under their orders and according to their direction. The contractor undertakes in general terms to do the work well. The company reserve the power not only to direct what shall be done, but how it shall be done. This is an important test of liability.”
    7 later decisions 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.