Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 117 U.S. 272 - Jefferson v. Driver

Jefferson v. Driver’s Empirical Analysis

117 U.S. 272 · 1886

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
10
cited 10 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
February 2003
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2003 · most notably Cochran v. Montgomery County (1905), Rosenthal v. Coates (1893)

9 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

1301886189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Cable v. Ellis · Bible Society v. Grove · Myers v. Swann · Edrington v. Jefferson

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

  1. ““As to the application of J. VV. Jefferson for a removal under the act of 1875, the rule in Cable v. Ellis, 110 U. S. 380 , 4 Sup. Ct. 85 , applies. lie was brought into the suit as a purchaser pendente lite, and the, relief asked against him is only an incident to the original controversy. The proceeding is merely ancillary to the suit pending when he bought the property in dispute, and under which he got possession. It is, in short, only a part of the machinery in the administration of the cause. By purchasing pendente lite he connected himself with the suit, subject to the disabilities of the other parties in respect to a removal at the time lie came in.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[b]y purchasing pendente lite he connected himself with the suit, subject to the disabilities of the other parties in respect to a removal at the time he came in.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “When a suit is between a citizen of the State in which it is brought and a citizen of another State, it may be so removed on the petition of the latter,”
    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.