Sinsheimer v. Simonson’s Empirical Analysis
107 F. 898 · 1901
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently April 1944
9 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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 Fred Bardes v. First National Bank of Hawarden Iowa · Marshall v. Knox · In re Chiles · In re Meyer · Simonson v. Sinsheimer
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"But it is well settled that a showing made by a respondent that he is unable to do an act: required of him upon an order to show cause is sufficient answer. It matters not, for the purpose of such a proceeding, that the inability to do the tiling required may be in consequence of his own fault, arising from a mere misconception of his rights, or committed before the court took jurisdiction of the matter. The court cannot compel an impossibility.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Holden
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.