Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen
E934450
Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen is a 1917 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited state authority over maritime workers’ compensation by holding that state laws could not interfere with the uniformity of federal admiralty and maritime law.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T11576372 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen Context triple: [United States Supreme Court cases of the White Court, hasNotableCase, Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen]
-
A.
Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. is a 1916 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal income tax and clarified the scope and constitutionality of the Sixteenth Amendment.
-
B.
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the limits of First Amendment petitioning rights when parties allegedly use governmental and judicial processes as part of an anticompetitive scheme in violation of antitrust laws.
-
C.
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld minimum wage laws and effectively ended the Lochner era by allowing greater government regulation of economic conditions.
-
D.
National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan
National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified the time limits for filing employment discrimination claims, distinguishing between discrete acts and continuing violations under Title VII.
-
E.
Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. United States
Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. United States is a notable U.S. Supreme Court decision from the White Court era involving federal regulation of railroads and interstate commerce.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen Target entity description: Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen is a 1917 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited state authority over maritime workers’ compensation by holding that state laws could not interfere with the uniformity of federal admiralty and maritime law.
-
A.
Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. is a 1916 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal income tax and clarified the scope and constitutionality of the Sixteenth Amendment.
-
B.
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the limits of First Amendment petitioning rights when parties allegedly use governmental and judicial processes as part of an anticompetitive scheme in violation of antitrust laws.
-
C.
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld minimum wage laws and effectively ended the Lochner era by allowing greater government regulation of economic conditions.
-
D.
National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan
National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified the time limits for filing employment discrimination claims, distinguishing between discrete acts and continuing violations under Title VII.
-
E.
Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. United States
Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. United States is a notable U.S. Supreme Court decision from the White Court era involving federal regulation of railroads and interstate commerce.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (36)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
admiralty law case ⓘ federal preemption case ⓘ maritime law case ⓘ |
| affects | division of regulatory power between federal and state governments in maritime matters ⓘ |
| appliesDoctrine |
federal preemption of conflicting state law
ⓘ
federal supremacy clause ⓘ uniformity principle in maritime law ⓘ |
| concerns |
application of a state workers’ compensation statute to maritime employment
ⓘ
compensation for injuries to a maritime worker ⓘ |
| hasArea | United States maritime commerce ⓘ |
| hasCitation | 244 U.S. 205 ⓘ |
| hasConstitutionalBasis |
Article III admiralty and maritime jurisdiction
ⓘ
Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasCourt | Supreme Court of the United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasDateDecided | May 21, 1917 ⓘ |
| hasImpact |
narrowed the application of state workers’ compensation schemes to maritime employees
ⓘ
reinforced federal control over maritime tort and compensation law ⓘ |
| hasJurisdiction | United States federal jurisdiction ⓘ |
| hasLegalDomain |
admiralty and maritime law
ⓘ
workers’ compensation law ⓘ |
| hasLegalIssue |
federal supremacy in admiralty and maritime law
ⓘ
scope of state authority over maritime workers’ compensation ⓘ uniformity of federal maritime law ⓘ |
| hasPetitioner | Southern Pacific Company NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasRespondent | Jensen NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasYearDecided | 1917 ⓘ |
| holds |
state laws may not interfere with the proper harmony and uniformity of general maritime law in its international and interstate relations
ⓘ
state workers’ compensation laws may not materially prejudice the characteristic features of the general maritime law ⓘ |
| influenced | development of the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act ⓘ |
| isCitedFor |
limits on state regulation of maritime injuries occurring on navigable waters
ⓘ
proposition that maritime law must remain uniform across states ⓘ |
| isPartOf | United States admiralty and maritime jurisprudence ⓘ |
| isPrecedentIn |
cases addressing conflict between state workers’ compensation laws and federal maritime law
ⓘ
cases involving injuries on navigable waters ⓘ |
| limits | state authority to regulate maritime workers’ compensation ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen Description of subject: Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen is a 1917 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited state authority over maritime workers’ compensation by holding that state laws could not interfere with the uniformity of federal admiralty and maritime law.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
United States Supreme Court cases of the White Court
→
hasNotableCase
→
Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen
ⓘ