Springer v. Seamen’s Empirical Analysis
821 F.2d 871 · 1987
Citation profile
61 federal appellate · 51 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 137 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2022 · most notably Jett v. Dallas Independent School District (1989), Correa-Martinez v. Arrillaga-Belendez (1990)
61 federal appellate · 51 district ·
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 39 U.S.C. § 201 · 39 U.S.C. § 401 · 39 U.S.C. § 410 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1985 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000D
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · United States Accardi v. Shaughnessy
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 137 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[n]ot only ordinary fact questions, but also 'evaluative applications of legal standards ... to the facts' are properly [for the factfinder]”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Application of the legal cause standard to the circumstances of a particular case is a function ordinarily performed by, and peculiarly within the competence of, the factfinder.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the reasonable foreseeability of [an intervening act's occurrence] is a factor in determining whether the intervening act relieves the actor from liability for his antecedent [wrongful act], and under the undisputed facts there is room for reasonable difference of opinion as to whether such act was [wrongful] or foreseeable, the question should be left for the jury.”
3 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.