Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 91 U.S. 692 - The "Colorado"

The "Colorado"’s Empirical Analysis

91 U.S. 692 · 1875

Citation profile

190
cited by 190 later decisions
15
cited 15 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
November 1980
most recently cited

57 federal appellate · 79 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 190 later decisions (15 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1980 · most notably The Oregon (1895), The Umbria (1897)

57 federal appellate · 79 district · 4 state decisions

320187518801890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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

  1. ““Different formulas have been suggested by different judges as criterions for determining whether the speed of a steamer in any given case was or was not greater than was consistent with the duty which the steamer owed to other vessels navigating the same waters; but porhaps no one yet suggested is more useful, or better suited to enable the inquirer to reach a correct conclusion, than the one adopted by the privy counsel. The Batavier, 40 Eng. Law & Eq. 25. In that case the court say, ‘At whatever rate slio [the steamer] was going, if going at such arate as made it dangerous to any craft which she ought to have seen, and might have seen, she had no right to go at that rate.’ ””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Lookouts,” says tbe Supremo Court, “are valueless unless they are properly stationed and vigilantly employed in the performance of (heir duty; and if they are not, and in consequence of their neglect the approaching vessel is not soon in season to prevent a collision, the fault is properly chargeable to the vessel, and will render her liable, unless the other vessel was guilty of violating the rules of navigation.” The Colorado, 91 U. S. 692 , 699, 23 L. Ed. 379 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Great difficulty would attend any effort to define, with, mathematical precision, what is a moderate speed in any particular case, further than to say that the speed ought not to be so great that the steamer cannot perform the duty imposed upon her by the act of Congress to keep out of the way of the sailing vessel, if the latter has in all respects complied with the rules of navigation.””
    2 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.