Rosenbaum v. Bauer’s Empirical Analysis
120 U.S. 450 · 1887
Citation profile
107 federal appellate · 37 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 252 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2006 · most notably United States v. New York Telephone Co. (1977), Marshall v. Marshall (2006)
107 federal appellate · 37 district · 9 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 Boom Company v. Patterson · State of Louisiana Elliott v. Jumel · United States v. Schurz · Riggs v. Johnson County · Gaines v. Fuentes
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 252 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Sec. 716. The Supreme Court and the Circuit and District Courts shall have power to issue writs of scire facias. They shall also have power to issue all writs not specifically provided for by statute, which may be necessary for the exercise ol' their respective jurisdictions, and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he writ cannot be used to confer a jurisdiction which the ... court would not have without it. It is authorized only when ancillary to a jurisdiction already acquired.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““It means, 'within the judicial cognizance/ within the capacity to determine the merits of the dispute or controversy, and to grant the relief asked for. The provision does not give countenance to the idea that the suit or proceeding is to be retained * * * till brought to a formal adjudication on the merits, when, at that ultimate stage, the court must say that the case is not within its jurisdiction, after the party successfully challenging the jurisdiction has been harassed by expense and injured by delay. But it means what it says: that the dismissal or remanding ‘shall’ be made whenever, ‘at any time’ after the suit is brought * * * it shall appear to the satisfaction of that court that there is, really and substantially, no dispute or controversy of which it has jurisdiction.””
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.