Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 135 U.S. 449 - Burns v. Rosenstein

Burns v. Rosenstein’s Empirical Analysis

135 U.S. 449 · 1890

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
April 1985
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1985 · most notably Kansas City Southern Railway Company v. Guardian Trust Company (1916), Central Improvement Co. v. Cambria Steel Co. (1913)

16 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

1001890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Trustees v. Greenough · Benjamin Story v. Louisa Livingston · Medsker v. Bonebrake · Charles McMicken v. Franklin Perin

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

  1. ““The allegations of the original bill justified the issuing of the attachment. It was right that the property taken under it should be cared for, and, as the court found that the plaintiffs were entitled to a decree against the defendants, a judgment for costs properly followed; and we perceive no reason why the plaintiffs should not have been allowed, as part of their costs, a reasonable amount for the expenses incurred in preserving the attached property, and for which they became primarily liable to the officer keeping it. We cannot say, upon the record before us, that the court ’below exceeded its discretion in apportioning the expenses thus incurred.””
    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.