Terry v. Sharon’s Empirical Analysis
131 U.S. 40 · 1889
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1990 · most notably Toucey v. New York Life Insurance (1941), Beavers v. Haubert (1905)
10 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 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 Mansfield Ry Co v. Swan · Sawyer · Hiram Barber v. Huldah a Barber by Her Next Friend George Cronkhite · De La Fayette Wilcox v. John Jackson · John Voorhees v. James Jackson
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““if the jurisdiction of the circuit court in the original suit were in any respect open to question on this appeal or on this motion, we think that the record below presents so much of the elements of jurisdiction as to need no further inquiry in that direction in this proceeding. It appears by the record that Sharon, the plaintiff in that suit, describes himself as a citizen of the state of Nevada, and the defendant Hill as a citizen of the state of California. This is sufficient to have given jurisdiction of the parties, and the object of the suit, the cancellation of a forged instrument, is one of the common heads of equity jurisdiction. * * * it is at least a prima facie case of jurisdiction as between the parties * * 131 U.S. at 48-49 , 9 S.Ct. at 707 .”
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.