Flower v. MacGinniss’s Empirical Analysis
112 F. 377 · 1901
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 1938
3 federal appellate · 2 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 Butler v. Fayerweather · Stevens v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co.
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In any case where it is necessary, in order to prevent a failure or delay of justice, any of the courts of the United States may grant a dedimus po-testatem to take depositions according to common usage.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The right of parties to obtain testimony, where it is necessary in order to prevent a failure or delay of justice, is carefully preserved by section 8(56 of the Revised Statutes, but this must be pursued by application to the court and upon such application the court will not sanction a merely inquisitorial proceeding.””
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.