Farley v. Kittson’s Empirical Analysis
120 U.S. 303 · 1887
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 13 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions (12 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1929 · most notably Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Co. (1913), Hollins v. Brierfield Coal & Iron Co. (1893)
19 federal appellate · 13 district · 12 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 National Bank v. Insurance Co. · Seitz v. Mitchell · The State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations v. The State of Massachusetts · Stead's executors v. Course
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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It clearly takes from the establishment of the plea the effect it had under the old law. When, by filing a replication, issue is taken upon a plea, the facts, if proven, will now avail the defendant only so far as, in law and equity, they ought to avail him. Under the existing rule, the court may, upon final hearing, do at least what, under the old rule, might have been done when the benefit of a plea was saved to the hearing. ‘When,' says Cooper, ‘the benefit of the plea is saved to the hearing, the decision of the cause does not rest upon' the truth of the matter of the plea, but the plaintiff may avoid it by other matter, which he is at liberty to adduce.’ ””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““But the proper office of a plea is not, like an. answer, to meet all the allegations of a hill, nor like a demurrer admitting those allegations to deny the equity of the hill; hut it is to prevent some distinct fact which of itself creates a bar to the suit, or to the part to which the plea applies, and thus to avoid the necessity of making the discovery asked for, and the expense of going into the evidence at large. Mitf. Eq. PI. (4th Ed.) 14, 219, 293; Story, Eq. PI. pars. 649, 652.”-”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““If he sets down the plea for argument, he thereby admits the truth of all the facts stated in the plea, and merely denies their sufficiency in point of law 1o prevent his recovery. If, on the other hand, he replies to the plea joining issue upon the fads averred in it, and so puts the defendant to the trouble and expense of proving his plea, he thereby, according to the English chancery practico, admits that, if the particular facts stated in the plea are true, they are sufficient in law to bar his recovery; and if they are proved to be true the bill must be dismissed, without reference to the equity arising from any other facts stated in the bill.””
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.