Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 112 U.S. 733 - St Paul Co v. United States

St Paul Co v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

112 U.S. 733 · 1885

Citation profile

67
cited by 67 later decisions
28
cited 28 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
August 2007
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 67 later decisions (28 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2007 · most notably United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (1949), Hobbs v. McLean (1886)

14 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

1401885189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Goodman v. Niblack · Erwin v. United States · Kelly v. Pittsburgh · Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company v. United States

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

  1. ““All transfers and assignments made of any claim upon the United States, or of any part or share thereof, or interest therein, whether absolute or conditional, and whatever may be the consideration therefor, and all powers of attorney, orders, or other authorities for receiving payment of any such claim, or of any part or Share thereof, shall be absolutely null and void, unless- (hey are freely made and executed in the presence of at least two attesting witnesses, after the allowance of such a claim, the ascertainment of the amount due, and the issuing of a warrant for the payment thereof. Such transfers, assignments, and powers of attorney, must recite the warrant for payment, and must be acknowledged by the person making them, before an officer haring authority to take acknowledgments of deeds, and shall he certified by the officer: and it must appear by the certificate that the officer, at file time of the acknowledgment, read and fully explained the transfer, assignment, or warrant of attorney to the person acknowledging the same.””
    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.