1 E.H. Smith 486 - York v. . Conde’s Empirical Analysis
1895
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1955 · most notably Martin v. National Surety Co. (1937), National Bank of Commerce v. Downie (1910)
9 federal appellate · 17 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 Hobbs v. McLean · Freedman's Saving & Trust Co. v. Shepherd · Goodman v. Niblack · Spofford v. Kirk · Field v. . the Mayor, C. of New-York
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that the money, claim and property claimed by the plaintiffs in this action to have been assigned to them by Wither by and Gaffney at the time of the pretended assignment thereof, constituted and was a claim against the United States Government, which had not been allowed, or the amount due thereon ascertained, or the warrant issued for the payment thereof, and that the pretended assignment thereof does not recite the warrant for payment issued by the United States, and is not acknowledged by the person making the same before an officer having authority to take acknowledgments of deeds, and is not certified by such officer; and that said pretended assignment is in violation of the laws of the United States and of the State of New York, and that the plaintiffs never derived any interest in the said contract with the United States by virtue of the said pretended assignment or otherwise, and are not the real parties in interest in this action and ought not therefore to maintain the same; that said Witherby and Gaffney never transferred any interest in the said contract to the said plaintiffs.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Conde v. York“This section has been considered in several cases by the Supreme Court of the United States. If that court has construed .the section so as to determine the point involved in this case we should deem it our duty to follow its decision. The judgment we shall render will not, we suppose, be subject to review by the Supreme Court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Conde v. York
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.