Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 109 N.Y. 441 - Fitzgerald v. . Quann

Fitzgerald v. . Quann’s Empirical Analysis

1888

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
10
states following
June 2001
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2001 · most notably Hewit v. Berlin Machine Works (1904), Dean v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co. (1890)

4 federal appellate · 35 state decisions — followed in 10 states

1801888189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Bertles v. . Nunan

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

  1. ““Counsel for the defendant, in his argument before us, concedes the rule to be well established, and almost universally acted on, that statutes changing the common law must be strictly construed, and that the common law must be held no farther abrogated than the clear import of the language used in the statute absolutely requires. However much modern judges might sometimes be inclined to doubt the beneficial results to be derived from an always strict adherence to the rule, grounded upon some possible doubts of the high order of excellence in all cases of the common law, or of its being without exception the perfection of human reasoning in any other than a very narrow, technical, and one-sided way, yet the rule itself is too securely and firmly established and grounded in our jurisprudence to be altered other than by legislative interference.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.