Roberts v. Benjamin’s Empirical Analysis
124 U.S. 64 · 1888
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 4 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 1984 · most notably David Lupton's Sons Company v. Automobile Club of America (1912), Shipman v. Straitsville Cent Min Co (1895)
37 federal appellate · 4 district · 18 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 Stanley v. Supervisors of Albany · William Tayloe v. The Merchants' Fire Insurance Company of Baltimore · Bond v. Dustin · Heckers v. Fowler · Miller v. Life Insurance
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The only questions open to review here are whether there was any error of law in the judgment rendered by the Circuit Court upon the facts found by the referee. The judgment having been entered ‘pursuant to the report of the referee,’ the facts found by him are conclusive in this court.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is contended by the defendants that the referee erred in taking the $34 per ton, the market value of the iron on November 7, 1879, as the measure of damages, instead of the market price in ¡September, when the iron was to be delivered, and when, it is alleged, the breach of the contract occurred. But, although the defendants did not deliver any of the iron on or about September 1, 1879, nor as soon as they had manufactured the required amount, yet it appears from the findings of fact, considered together, 'that the breach of the contract did not take place until November 7, 1879. The statement in the findings, that the defendants ‘postponed the execution of the contract from time to time/ and finally insisted upon certain requirements as conditions of the delivery of the iron, must be accepted as a statement that the postponement of the execution of the contract from time to time down to Novem ber 7,1879, was with the assent of the plaintiff.””
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.