Pollard v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
93 F.2d 193 · 1937
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 1970
8 federal appellate · 1 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
Relies on Miller v. Union Pacific R. · Watts v. Montgomery Traction Co. · Cooper v. Agee · Southern Ry. Co. v. Lambert · 100 Ind. App. 515 - Morley v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘After the train has reached the crossing, the duty of the gatekeeper or flagman ends as to that train, and such person is not negligent in then leaving the position of duty since the train itself it then sufficient warning.’ 52 Corpus Juris, 205; Southern Ry. Co. v. Lambert, 230 Ala. 162 , 160 So. 262 ; Mabray v. Union Pacific R. Co. (D. C.) 5 F.Supp. 397 ; Phillips v. Davis, 3 Cir., 3 F.2d 798 , 40 A.L.R. 1241 ; Baltimore & O. Ry. Co. v. Shaw, 3 Cir., 35 F.2d 410 ; Morley v. Cleveland [C. C. & St. L.] R. Co., 100 Ind.App. 515 , 194 N.E. 806 .””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.