Smith Engineering Co. v. Rice’s Empirical Analysis
102 F.2d 492 · 1938
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2013 · most notably Snider v. Melindez (1999), Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. The Chase Manhattan Bank, Successor of the Chase National Bank of the City of New York, Trustee and Alleged Transferee of Marie Elizabeth Moran, the Chase Manhattan Bank, Sucessor of the Chase National Bank of the City of New York, Trustee and Alleged Transferee of Marie Elizabeth Moran v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1958)
30 federal appellate · 4 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 Erie Co v. Tompkins · Swift v. Tyson · Miller v. Stewart · Singles v. United States · Gas Products Co. v. Rankin
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We see no reason why we should make what we think would be an erroneous decision, because the applicable law was not insisted upon by one of the parties.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The ‘common law of England’ as used in the statute ‘means that body of jurisprudence as applied and modified by the courts of this country up to the time it became a rule of decision in this commonwealth’ and ‘that time began with our first territorial Legislature.’ (Citing cases.) “Under the above-quoted statute [2 Rev. Codes Mont.1921, § 5672, now R.C.M.1947, § 12-103], two questions are apparent: (1) What was the common law of England, as defined by Montana decisions, up to 1864, the date of the organization of Montana as a territory? “(2) Is that law inconsistent or repugnant to the Montana Codes?””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“¡ “The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to-or inconsistent with the constitution of the United States, or the constitution or laws of this state, or of the codes, is the rule of decision in all the courts of this state.””
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.