Williams v. Nottawa’s Empirical Analysis
104 U.S. 209 · 1881
Citation profile
62 federal appellate · 28 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 215 later decisions (32 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2013 · most notably St Paul Mercury Indemnity Co v. Red Cab Co (1938), Mansfield Ry Co v. Swan (1884)
62 federal appellate · 28 district · 3 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 Barney v. Baltimore City · Jennet Smith Calvin Powe and Thomas Powe v. Joseph Kernochen · John Gordon v. James Longest
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 215 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If in any suit commenced in a district court, or removed from a State Court to a district court of the United Srates, it shall appear to the satisfaction of the said district court, at any time after such suit has been brought or removed thereto, that such suit does not really and substantially involve a dispute or controversy properly within the jurisdiction of said district court, or that the parties to said suit have been improperly or collusively made or joined, either as plaintiffs or defendants, for the purpose of creating a case cognizable or removable under this chapter, the said district court shall proceed no further therein, but shall dismiss the suit or remand it to the court from which it was removed, as justice may require, and shall make such, order as to costs as shall be just.””
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Congress was specially careful to guard against the consequences of collusive transfers to make parties, and imposed the duty on the court, on its own motion, without waiting for the parties, to stop all further proceedings and dismiss the suit the moment anything of the kind appeared. This was for the protection of the court as well as parties against frauds upon its jurisdiction. * * * ””
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hartog v. Memory · Simon v. House“Whether, if a defendant allows a casé to go on until judgment has been rendered ■ against him, he can take advantage of the objection on appeal, or writ of error, we need not decide. That would be a different case from this.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Morris v. Gilmer
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.