Calhoun County v. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis
137 F.2d 130 · 1943
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 1997
8 federal appellate · 1 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 Langnes v. Green · Minnesota v. United States · United States v. San Jacinto Tin Co. · Morley Const Co v. Maryland Casualty Co · The United States v. Jonah Crosby
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We doubt whether the United States is so far a party as to be entitled of right to move for a rehearing. It cannot be made a party so as to be bound by a judgment unless a law authorizes it. State of Minnesota v. United States, 305 U.S. 382, 888 , 59 S.Ct. 292 , 83 L.Ed. 235 ; Munro v. United States, 303 U. S. 36, 41 , 58 S.Ct. 42 , 82 L.Ed. 633 . But a statute, R.S. sec. 359, 5 U.S.C.A. sec. 309 , provides that “The Attorney General may, whenever he deems it for the interest of the United States, either in person conduct and argue any case in any court of the United States in which the United States is interested, or may direct the Solicitor General or any officer of the Department of Justice to do so.” See, also, B.S. sec. 367, 5 U.S.C.A. sec. 316 . It appears from a certified copy now filed that this is in fact what was done in the court below, the district attorney being allowed to-appear to suggest the interest of the United States, rather than the United States intervening as a party. The courts have always been ready to permit such suggestion and assistance from the attorney general when the United States was not or could not be a party. In the Schooner Exchange, 7 Cranch. 116, 117, 3 L.Ed. 287 , the foreign relations of the United States were involved, and the United States attorney was allowed to appear and really conducted the defense of the cause. In State of Florida v. State of Georgia, 17 How. 478 , 15 L.Ed. 181 , the United States had an interest in land affect”
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.