Bank of Kentucky v. Adams Express Co.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

50 federal appellate · 26 district · 71 state decisions

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

1. ““The railroad company, in transporting the messenger of the defendants and the express matter in his charge, was the agent of somebody; either of the express company, or of the shippers or consignees of the property. That it was the agent of the defendants is quite clear. It was employed by them and paid by them. The service it was called upon to perform was a service for the defendants; a duty incumbent upon them, and not upon the plaintiffs. The latter had nothing to do with the employment. It was neither directed by them, nor had they any control over the railroad company or its employes. It is true the defendants had also no control over the company or its servants; hut they were its employers, presumably they paid for its service; and that service was directly and immediately for them. Control of the conduct of an agency is not in all cases essential to liability for the consequences of that conduct. If any one is to be affected by the acts or omissions of persons employed to do a particular service, surely it must be ho who gave the employment. Their acts become his, because done in his service and by his direction. Moreover, a common carrier who undertakes for himself to perform an entire service lias no authority to constitute another person or corporation the agent of his consignor or consignee. He may employ a subordinate agency; but it must be subordinate to him, and not to one who neither employs it nor pays it, nor has any right to interfere with it.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Smeltzer v. St. Louis & S. F. R.

2. “The duty of a common carrier is to transport and deliver safely. He is made, by law, an insurer against all failure to perform this duty, except such failure as may be caused by the public enemy, or what is denominated the act of God.” The nature of a common carrier's liability when it has transported property and deposited it in a warehouse to await delivery to the consignee is a question on which three distinct views have been taken by the courts of this country: First. When the transit is ended and the carrier has placed the goods in its warehouse to await delivery to the consignee, its liability as carrier is ended though no notice is given to the consignee, and the carrier is thereafter liable as warehouseman only. This doctrine is what is known as "the Massachusetts rule.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 84 Ind. App. 283 - American Railway Express Co. v. Rhody

3. ““It is not to be presumed that the parties intended to make a contract which the law does not allow. Looked at from this standpoint, can it be said that any of the claims objected to can be construed as plainly attempting, contrary to the first section, to relieve the carrier from liability for loss or damage arising from negligence, fault, or failure in proper loading, stowage, custody, care, or proper delivery of any and all lawful merchandise committed to its or their charge?””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Cobb