Vietor v. Arthur’s Empirical Analysis
104 U.S. 498 · 1881
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1955 · most notably Bate Refrigerating Co. v. Sulzberger (1895), Myers v. Anderson (1915)
2 federal appellate · 3 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 United States v. Bowen · Movius v. Arthur
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is also well settled that when congress has designated an article by its specific name, and imposed a duty on it by such name, general terms in a later act, or other parts of the same act, although sufficiently broad to comprehend such article, are not applicable to it. * * * It is conceded that stockings made on frames have been dutiable eo nomine since 1842, and by four different enactments.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vietor v. Arthur““Caps, gloves, leggins, mits, socks, stockings, wove shirts and drawers, and all similar articles made on frames, of whatever material composed, worn by men, women and children, and not otherwise provided for.” 12 St.» at Large, 556.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vietor v. Arthur“all manufactures of every description, composed wholly or in part of worsted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Seeberger v. Cahn
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.