Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 128 U.S. 617 - Callaghan v. Myers

Callaghan v. Myers’s Empirical Analysis

128 U.S. 617 · 1888

Citation profile

482
cited by 482 later decisions
45
cited 45 times by the Supreme Court
19
states following
June 2020
most recently cited

170 federal appellate · 67 district · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 482 later decisions (45 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2020 · most notably Crowell v. Benson (1932), Kimberly v. Arms (1889)

170 federal appellate · 67 district · 33 state decisions — followed in 19 states

720188818901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Elizabeth v. Pavement Co. · Tilghman v. Proctor · Rubber Company v. Goodyear · Birdsell v. Shaliol

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

  1. “one of the most significant evidences of infringement.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““There is in such case a tacit assent by the government to his exercising such privilege. The universal practical construction has been that such right exists, unless it is affirmatively forbidden or taken away; and the right has been exercised by numerous reporters, officially appointed, made sworn public officers, and paid a salary under the governments both of states and of the United States.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““In- cases of this kind referred to a master to state an account, depending as they do upon an examination of books, upon the oral testimony of witnesses, and perhaps, as in this case, upon the opinions of an expert, IPs conclusions have every reasonable presumption in their favor, and are not to be set aside or modified unless there clearly appears to have been error or mistake on his part.””
    2 later decisions 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.