Bondurant v. Watson’s Empirical Analysis
103 U.S. 281 · 1880
Citation profile
35 federal appellate · 13 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2011 · most notably Simon v. Southern Railway Co. (1915), Denny v. Pironi (1891)
35 federal appellate · 13 district · 5 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 Insurance Company v. Pechner · Bank v. Turnbull & Co. · Suydam v. Williamson · Gustavus Beauregard v. The City of New Orleans
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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is to be observed that the injunction had already been granted by the state court before the application for removal was made. The interest and purpose of [fixe defendant], who asked for the removal, was to get the injunction dissolved. If [the plaintiff) had filed his petition for injunction in the state court, and, before it was allowed, had petitioned for a removal of the cause to the circuit court, with the design of applying to that court for his injunction, the objection to the right of removal would have force. That would have been an evasion of the statute. But that is not this case. The act of March 3, 1875, provides that all injunctions had in the suit before its removal shall remain in full force and effect until dissolved or modifled by the court to which the suit shall be removed.' It provides for removals, without making any exception, of cases in which an injunction has already been allowed to stay proceedings in a state coui-t. It would not be according to the well-settled rules of statutory construction to import an exception into this statute from a prior one on a different subject.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““That was a statutory proceeding to try in a summary way the title to personal property seized on execution. It was nothing more than a method prescribed by the law to enable the court to direct and control its own process, and, as decided by this court, was merely auxiliary to, and a graft upon, the original action.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The decisions above cited, establishing as they do a rule of real property in the state of Louisiana, are binding on this court, and are conclusive of this ease.” So let us examine the Tennessee decisions as to tenants by the entirety, for they are, if they establish the nature of the title, “binding on this court and conclusive of this ease.””
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.