Moran v. Sturges’s Empirical Analysis
154 U.S. 256 · 1894
Citation profile
146 federal appellate · 77 district · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 389 later decisions (23 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2019 · most notably Penn General Casualty Co v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Schnader (1935), Beavers v. Haubert (1905)
146 federal appellate · 77 district · 50 state decisions — followed in 18 states
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 Covell v. Heyman · The Lottawanna · Byers v. McAuley · Cole v. Cunningham · Freeman v. Howe
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 389 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As between two courts of concurrent and co-ordinate jurisdiction, having like jurisdiction over the subject-matter in controversy, the court which first obtains jurisdiction is entitled to retain it without interference, and cannot be deprived of its right to do so because it may not have first obtained physical possession of the property in dispute.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is a doctrine of láw too long established to require a citation of authorities that, where a court has jurisdiction,- it has a right to decide every question which occurs in the cause, and whether its decision be correct or otherwise, its judgment, till reversed, is regarded as binding in every other court; and that, where the jurisdiction of a court, and the right of a plaintiff to prosecute his suit in it, have once attached, that right cannot be arrested or taken away by proceedings in another court. These rules have their foundation, not merely in comity, but on necessity. For if one may enjoin, the other may retort by injunction.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]t has been settled so long, that we know not its beginning, that a suit in the admiralty to enforce and execute a lien, is not an action against any particular person to compel him to do or forbear anything, but a claim against all mankind; a suit in rem, asserting the claim of the libelant to the thing, as against all the world.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Universal Oil Ltd. v. Allfirst Bank · In RE: MILLENIUM SEACARRIERS, INC., DEBTOR, UNIVERSAL OIL LTD, LIBERIAN INTERNATIONAL SHIP & CORPORATE REGISTRY, LLC v. ALLFIRST BANK, FORMERLY KNOWN AS FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MARYLAND, FORMERLY KNOWN AS WAYLAND INVESTMENT FUNDS, LLC, ASPIDA TRAVEL, LTD, ASSURANCE FORENINGEN SKULD (GJENSIDIG)—DEN DAN, BREAKBULK MARINE SERVICES, LTD., CANFORNAV, LTD., THE CREW OF THE DEBTOR'S VESSELL DET NORSKE VERITAS FUEL AND MARINE MARKETING, GULF STATES MARINE, INC, IHI MARINE CO., LTD., KENT TRADE & FINANCE, MARITIME TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF RUSSIA, OMNI NAVIGATION, LTD., ORIENT SHIPPING, PACNAV, S.A., PANCOAST TRADING, S.A., TOTAL FINA ELF LUBRIFIANTS, S.A., UNISERVICE MEDITERRA, PRAXIS ENERGY AGENTS S.A., PRAXIS ENERGY AGENTS S.A. v. ALLFIRST BANK, FORMERLY KNOWN AS FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MARYLAND, FORMERLY KNOWN AS WAYLAND INVESTMENTS FUNDS, LLC, MILLENIUM SEACARRIERS, INC., IVY NAVIGATION, LTD., MILLENIUM II, INC., MILLENIUM IV, INC., MILLENIUM V, INC., MILLENIUM VI, INC., MILLENIUM ALEKSANDER, INC., MILLENIUM AMETHYST, INC., MILLENIUM ASSET INC., MILLENIUM BALTIC, INC., ASPIDA TRAVEL, LTD., ASSURANCE FORENINGEN SKULD (GJENSIDIG)—DEN DAN, BREAKBULK MARINE SERVICES, LTD., CANFORNAV, LTD., THE CREW OF THE DEBTOR'S VESSELL DET NORSKE VERITAS FUEL AND MARINE MARKETING, GULF STATES MARINE, INC, IHI MARINE CO., LTD., KENT TRADE & FINANCE, MARITIME TRANSPORT WORKERS, UNION OF RUSSIA, OMNI NAVIGATION, LTD., ORIENT SHIPPING, PACNAV, S.A., PANCOAST TRADING S.A., TOTAL FINA ELF LUBRIFIANTS, S.A., UNISERVICE MEDITERRA
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.