Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 9 F.2d 17 - Linen Thread Co. v. Shaw

Linen Thread Co. v. Shaw’s Empirical Analysis

9 F.2d 17 · 1925

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
October 2006
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2006

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

40192519301940195019601970198019902000decided

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.

Appellate journey

Relationships

Relies on Electro-Dynamic Co. v. The Electron · Lord v. The Hiram R. Dixon · Townsley v. Barneson · Reichert Towing Line, Inc., v. Long Island Machine & Marine Const. Co. · The Venezuela

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

  1. “The rule that damages, if uncertain, cannot be recovered, applies to their nature, and not to their extent. If the damage is certain, the fact that its extent is uncertain does not prevent a recovery.”
    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.