Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 137 U.S. 632 - Red River Cattle Co. v. Needham

Red River Cattle Co. v. Needham’s Empirical Analysis

137 U.S. 632 · 1891

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
16
cited 16 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
December 1939
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1939 · most notably United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Ass'n (1897), Clark v. Paul Gray, Inc. (1939)

9 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

15018911900191019201930decided

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.

Appellate journey

Relationships

Relies on Zeigler v. Hopkins · Reynolds v. Burns · Course v. Stead · Wilson v. Blair

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

  1. ““ (1) Where the demand is not for money but the nature of the action requires the value of the thing demanded to be stated in the pleadings, affidavits will not be réceived here to vary the value as appearing upon the face of the record ; (2) nor will the filing of such affidavits be ordinarily permitted where evidence of value has been adduced below on both sides, and the proofs have been transmitted either with or without the announcement of a definite conclusion deduced therefrom ; (3) but where the writ of error is brought or appeal taken without question as to the value, and the latter is nowhere disclosed by the record, affidavits may be .received to establish the jurisdictional amount, and counter affidavits may be allowed if the existence of such value is denied in good faith.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The practice of permitting affidavits to be filed in tliis court arose from instances of accidental omission where the value was not really in dispute, and it should not ho encouraged to the extent of requiring us to reach a result upon that careful weighing of conflicting evidence so frequently involved in determining issues of fact. If there be a real controversy on the point, let it he settled below in the first instance, and on due notice; not here, upon ex parte opinions which may embody nothing more than speculative conclusions.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““On this day came on to be heard the motion of the plaintiffs to set aside the writ of error granted herein; and the court having heard and considered said motion, and being of the opinion that the question of the value of the land in controversy is a question that the trial judge is not called upon to decide, but one to be determined in the supreme court on the affidavits, if they see fit to consider them, in order to determine their jurisdiction, it if /•tiered by the court that said motion be refused. ””
    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.