Chapman v. Barney’s Empirical Analysis
129 U.S. 677 · 1889
Citation profile
164 federal appellate · 52 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 382 later decisions (26 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2022 · most notably Carden v. Arkoma Associates (1990), Navarro Savings Assn. v. Lee (1980)
164 federal appellate · 52 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 Grace v. American Central Insurance · Robertson v. Cease · Cameron v. Hodges · Continental Insurance v. Rhoads
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 382 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“On looking into the record, we find no satisfactory showing as to the citizenship of the plaintiff. The allegation of the amended petition is that the United States Express Company is a joint-stock company organized under a law of the state of New York, and is a citizen of that state. But the express company cannot be a citizen of New York, unthin the meaning of the statutes regulating jurisdiction, unless it be a corporation. [T]he company ... is, a mere partnership .... .... The company may been organized under the laws of the State of New York, and may be doing business in that State, and yet all the members of it may not be citizens of that State. The record does not show the citizenship of Barney, or of any of the members of the company-”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In its original form, this was an action of assumpsit, brought in the court below by the United. States Express Company, alleged to have been organized under and by virtue of the laws of the state of New York, and a citizen of that state, against Heman B. Chapman, a citizen of Illinois””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Taylor v. Weir““We do not think the first assignment of error well taken. Amendments are discretionary with the court below, and not reviewable by this court.””
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.