The "Juniata."’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 federal appellate · 14 district · 5 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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The branch of the case relative to the United States is upon a different footing. Their flatboat is neither alleged nor proved to have been in anywise in fault. The principle of apportionment has, therefore, no application to them. Their boat not being inculpated, they are entitled to full damages. The decree of the circuit court is erroneous in not giving it to them. We should adjudge that half the amount should be paid by the tug [The Neafie], and the other half by the steamer [The Juniata], but that the libel of the United States is against the steamer alone. The tug, therefore, cannot be reached in this proceeding.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Coats v. Penrod Drilling Corp.

2. ““The decree must therefore he changed so as to require full payment to be made to the United States by the claimants of the Juniata. Whatever their rights may be against Pursglove by reason of such payment of more than one-half must be settled in another proceeding. It cannot be done in this litigation.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. The Job T. Wilson

3. “fault on both sides being established, an apportionment of the damages necessarily followed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Coats v. Penrod Drilling Corp.