Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 111 F.1d 1002 - Perry v. Hoskins

Perry v. Hoskins’s Empirical Analysis

111 F. 1002 · 1899

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
March 1939
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 1939

1 federal appellate · 3 district ·

3018991900191019201930decided

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.

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

  1. ““All the features in detail must be treated as old, for the stone cutter's art, as known and practiced from a very early period, has covered all conceivable shapes and forms in monuments and statuary, and the combination does noi, as it seems to me, amount to a new and original design.””
    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.