Simeon v. T. Smith & Son, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
852 F.2d 1421 · 1988
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently May 2020 · most notably Phillips v. Western Company of North America (1992), Coats v. Penrod Drilling Corp. (1993)
38 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions
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 33 U.S.C. § 901 · 33 U.S.C. § 905 · 45 U.S.C. § 51 · 45 U.S.C. § 53 · 45 U.S.C. § 54 · 45 U.S.C. § 56 · 5 U.S.C. § 8101
Relies on Seas Shipping Co. v. Sieracki · Ryan Stevedoring Co. v. Pan-Atlantic Steamship Corp. · Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn · East River Steamship Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval Inc. · Truong Dinh Hung v. United States
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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“entirely disproportionate to the injury sustained.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The traditional view is that there can be no contribution between concurrent tortfeasors unless they share a “common legal liability” toward the plaintiff. F. Harper, F. James, O. Gray, 3 The Law of Torts § 10.2 at 46 (2d ed. 1986); W. Prosser & P. Keeton, supra, § 50 at 339-40. The contribution action arises from the original obligation that the party cast in contribution owed to the plaintiff. “If there was never any such liability, as where the contribution defendant has the defense of family immunity, assumption of risk, or the application of an automobile guest statute, or the substitution or workers’ compensation for common law liability, then there is no liability for contribution.” W. Prosser & P. Keeton, supra § 50 at 339-340.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he courts generally have considered that the recovery of the spouse ... will be defeated or diminished by defenses which would bar or diminish that of the injured spouse.... Thus contributory negligence ... on the part of the injured person has been held to defeat recovery, or, in comparative negligence states, to reduce it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.