Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 104 U.S. 554 - Jones v. Buckell

Jones v. Buckell’s Empirical Analysis

104 U.S. 554 · 1881

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
April 1928
most recently cited

20 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1928 · most notably Eastman Kodak Co of New York v. Southern Photo Materials Co (1927), Krauss Bros. Lumber Co. v. Mellon (1928)

20 federal appellate ·

10018811890190019101920decided

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 Railway Company v. Heck · Henderson v. Moore · Dunlop v. Munroe · Reed v. Gardner

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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Copies of deeds and a stipulation in respect to evidence are found in the transcript, but they are nowhere referred to in the bill of exceptions, and it is not even stated in the record that they were used at the trial. As long ago as Dunlop v. Munroe, 7 Cranch, 242 , 270, 3 L. Ed. 329 , it was said by this court that ‘each bill of exceptions must be considered as presenting a distinct and substantive case; and it is on the evidence stated in itself alone that the court is to decide.’ Of course, evidence may be included in a bill of exceptions by appropriate reference to oilier parts of the record, and if that had been done here it might have been enough.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““With no issue made directly "by the pleading, and no evidence set forth or referred to in the bill of exceptions, showing the materiality of the charge complained of, the case presents to us only an abstract proposition of law. which may or may not have been stated by the court in a way to be injurious to the plaintiffs in error. Such a proposition we are not required to consider.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““ Of course, evidence may be included in a bill of exceptions by appropriate reference to other parts of the record, and if that had been done here it might have been énough.””
    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.