Adams v. Shirk’s Empirical Analysis
117 F. 801 · 1902
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1955
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
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 Morris v. Gilmer · Anderson v. Watt · Farmington Village Corp v. Pillsbury · Union Mutual Life Insurance v. Hanford · Hartog v. Memory
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The question is npt, as plaintiff in error contends, whether the defendants in error have discharged the burden of proving that Elbert W. Shirk was a citizen of Indiana. The proper allegation of .-jurisdictional facts, prima facie,- was true. Simply to deny that Elbert TV. Shirk was a citizen of Indiana would not show a want of jurisdiction. I-Ie may have been a citizen of some other state than Illinois, whereof plaintiff in error was a citizen. That Elbert TV. Shirk, was a citizen of Illinois was a material and necessary allegation. It was an affirmative averment, the burden of iiroving which, even under a proper plea in abatement, would have fallen on the plaintiff in error. Under the plea in the present ease, the office of which was no broader than a motion or a suggestion to the court to protect itself from imposition, the burden most assuredly was upon llio moving party. The plaintiff in error introduced no evidence on the subject. The evidence of defendants in error does not establish that Elbeit W. Shirk was a citizen of Illinois, and that the Circuit Court was imposed upon.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hill v. Walker““The proper allegation of jurisdictional facts, prima fade, was true. Simply to deny that ’» * * Shirk was a citizen o£ Indiana would not show a want of jurisdiction. He may havo been a citizen of some other state than Illinois, whereof plaintiff in error was a citizen. That * * * Shirk was a. citizen of Illinois was a material and necessary allegation. It was an affirmative averment, the burden of proving which, even under a proper plea in abatement, would have fallen on plaintiff in error.’3”
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.