United States v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
131 U.S. 1 · 1889
Citation profile
95 federal appellate · 11 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 436 later decisions (49 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2017 · most notably United States v. Testan (1976), United States v. Sherwood (1941)
95 federal appellate · 11 district · 15 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 William Marbury v. James Madison · United States v. Behan · United States v. Klein · Hollister v. Benedict Burnham Manuf'G
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 436 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The sections of the act of 1863 referred to in this opinion are still in force, not being repealed by the act of 1887, which only repeals ‘all laws and parts of laws inconsistent’ therewith. Section 5, relating to appeals, is transferred to section 707 of the Revised Statutes, giving an appeal to this court ‘where the amount in controversy exceeds $3,000;’ and section 7, relating to the mode of paying judgments out of a general appropriation, and allowing interest where a judgment is affirmed, is contained in sections 1089, 1090 of the Revised Statutes. These sections are still the law on the subjects to which they relate, being necessary to the completion of the system, and not being supplied by any other enactments. Indeed, they are expressly retained. The fourth section of the act of 1887 declares that ‘the jurisdiction of the respective courts of the United States proceeding under this act, including the right of exception and appeal, shall be governed by the law now in force, in so far as th,e same is applicable, and not inconsistent with the provisions of this act;’ and the ninth section declares ‘that the plaintiff or the United States, in any suit brought under the provisions of this act, shall have the same rights of appeal or writ of error as are now reserved in the statutes of the United States in that behalf made, and upon the conditions and limitations therein contained.’ These provisions undoubtedly include the court of claims as well as the district and circui”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“An act to provide for the bringing of suits against the government of the United States,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“* * * [I]n respect of which claims the party would be entitled to redress against the United States either in a court of law, equity, or admiralty if the United States were suable. [ 24 Stat. 505 ]”
2 later decisions 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.