Cabasug v. Crane Co.’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 16 U.S.C. § 457 · 28 U.S.C. § 1333 · 46 U.S.C. § 30101 (Extension of Admiralty Jurisdiction Act)
Relies on Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc. · Executive Jet Aviation, Inc. v. City of Cleveland · Jerome Grubart Inc v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company City of Chicago · Foremost Insurance v. Richardson · Sisson v. Ruby
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[E]xposure to defective products creates unsafe working conditions that could cause labor shortages on the ships due to injuries sustained aboard. And a shortage of this nature “could be exacerbated by fear of exposure by crew members and potential crew members alike.” Any such occurrence would disrupt the Navy’s ability to protect other commercial ships at sea if called upon to do so.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“in or on navigable waters for purposes of admiralty jurisdiction”
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.