In re Shoesmith’s Empirical Analysis
135 F. 684 · 1905
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 1994 · most notably Smiley v. First National Bank of Belleville (1989), Congress Talcott Corp. v. Sicari (In Re Sicari) (1994)
16 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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 Bank v. Sherman · Blythe v. Hinckley · Smith v. McKay · Elliott v. Sackett · Webster v. Fleming
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Another question suggested at the argument has relation to the jurisdiction of the court below. It is contended that because the first petition filed by the creditor was defective, and a sufficient amended petition was filed more than four months after the last fraudulent transfer of the property, the court had no power to permit an amendment, and was therefore without jurisdiction to entertain the proceedings. The district court had jurisdiction of the parties. It had jurisdiction of the subject-matter. It has general and exclusive jurisdiction of bankruptcy proceedings. The objection goes to the want of equity exhibited by the petition, not to the want of power in the court. There was jurisdiction to determine the sufficiency of the petition, and it was complete to permit any amendment. The jurisdiction in such cases comes from the statute, and is not conferred by the accuracy and precision of the averments made in the petition. Smith v. McKay, 161 U.S. 355 , 358, 16 S.Ct. 490, 40 L.Ed. 731; Blythe v. Hinckley, 173 U.S. 501 , 19 S.Ct. 497, 43 L.Ed. 783. And the amendment, when filed, relates to and takes effect as of the date of the filing of the original petition. Bank v. Sherman, 101 U. S. 403 , 25 L.Ed. 866.”
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.