Seeberger v. Farwell’s Empirical Analysis
139 U.S. 608 · 1891
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2017 · most notably United States v. Bernard Citroen (1912), Patton v. United States (1895)
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 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.
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““That manufacturers and importers had the right to adjust themselves to the foregoing clause of the tariff, and to manufacture the goods with only a small per centage of cotton, for the purpose of making them dutiable at the lower rate,” and that, “although the goods in question contained so small an amount of cotton that the ordinary dealer in them and the ordinary examiner would not detect the cotton without a close and careful examination, that did not change the legal right of the plaintiffs.to bring their goods within the operation of the clause involved by the admixture of even a small percentage of cotton, if they could do so.””
3 later decisions 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.