Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 92 U.S. 432 - The " America."

The " America."’s Empirical Analysis

92 U.S. 432 · 1875

Citation profile

106
cited by 106 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
March 1973
most recently cited

47 federal appellate · 30 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 106 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1973 · most notably Belden v. Chase (1893), The Max Morris (1890)

47 federal appellate · 30 district · 1 state decisions

21018751880189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

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

Relies on Railroad Company v. Dubois · James Peck v. John Sanderson

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

  1. ““Sailing rules were ordained to prevent collisions between ships employed in navigation, and to preserve life and property embarked in that perilous pursuit, and not to enable those whose duty it is to adopt, if «possible, the necessary precautions to avoid such a disaster, to determine how little they can do in that direction without becoming responsible for its consequences, in case it occurs.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Steamships meeting end on, or nearly end on, should seasonably adopt the required precaution; and neither can be excused from responsibility, in case of omission, merely upon the ground that it was the duty of the other to have adopted the corresponding precaution at the same time, if it appears that the party setting up that excuse enjoyed equal facility to obey the requirement with the other party, and might have prevented the disaster. Imperative obligation is imposed upon each to comply with the rule of navigation; nor will the neglect of one excuse the other in a ease where each might have prevented the disaster, as the law requires both to adopt every necessary precaution, if practicable, to prevent the collision, and will not tolerate any attempt of either, in such an emergency, to apportion the required precaution to avoid the impending danger, in case where both or either might secure perfect safety to both ships and all intrusted with their control and management.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Argument to show that nothing could have been done at the moment to avoid the collision is quite unnecessary, as the proposition is self-evident; but the fault consists in getting the two vessels into that dangerous situation. Precautions in such cases must be seasonable in order to be effectual; and if they are. not so, and the collision ensues in consequence' of such delay, it is no defence to allege and prove that nothing more could be done at the moment to prevent it, nor to allege and prove that the necessity for precautionary measures was not perceived until it was too late to render them availing.” (My emphasis.)”
    1 later decision 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.