Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 153 U.S. 465 - Groves v. Sentell

Groves v. Sentell’s Empirical Analysis

153 U.S. 465 · 1894

Citation profile

135
cited by 135 later decisions
7
cited 7 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
July 1977
most recently cited

51 federal appellate · 11 district · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 135 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1977 · most notably Sanders v. Armour Fertilizer Works (1934), Schirmer Stevedoring Co. v. Seaboard Stevedoring Corp. (1962)

51 federal appellate · 11 district · 33 state decisions

450189419001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Viterbo v. Friedlander · Killian v. Ebbinghaus · The " Stephen Morgan." · Pepper v. Dunlap

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

  1. ““The general rule is that a party who has an interest in the subject-matter of the suit cannot filo a ‘bill of interpleader,’ strictly so called. In fact, the assertion of perfect disinterestedness is an essential ingredient of such a bill.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Though it was allowable when so situated to file a bill in the nature of a bill of interpleader (Bedell v. Hoffman, supra) we think it clear that his ultimate interest prevents him from being allowed his solicitor's fee from the fund dedicated to the payment of the mortgage, thereby diminishing the security of the mortgage creditor.”
    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.