Chappell v. Waterworth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

48 federal appellate · 19 district · 7 state decisions

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

1. ““The question presented by the pleadings considered in the opinion below, and argued at the bar, cannot be decided upon this record, because the case was removed into.the Circuit Court of the United States without authority of law. The question of removal is governed by the decision of this court at the last term in Tennessee v. Bank of Commerce, 152 U. S. 454 [ 14 Sup. Ct. 654 , 38 L. Ed. 511 ], by which, upon full consideration, it was adjudged that under the acts of March 3, 1887, c. 373 ( 24 Stat. 552 ), and August 13, 1888, c. 866 ( 25 Stat. 433 ), a case (not depending on the citizenship of the parties, nor otherwise specially provided for) cannot be removed from a state court into the Circuit Court of the United States, as one arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States, unless that appears by the plaintiff's statement of his own claim; and that, if it does not so appear, the want cannot be supplied by any statement in the petition for removal or in the subsequent pleadings.””

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. City of Ysleta v. Canda · Cox v. Gilmer

2. ““A cause cannot be renioved from a state court simply because, in the progress of the litigation, it may become necessary to give a construction to the Constitution or laws of the United States. The decision of the case must depend upon that construction. The suit must, in part at least, arise out of a controversy between the parties in regard to the operation and effect of the Constitution or laws upon the facts involved. That this was the intention of Congress is apparent from section 5 of the act of 1875, which requires the Circuit Court to dismiss the cause, or remand it to the state court if it shall appear, ‘at any time after such suit has been brought or removed thereto, that such suit does not really or substantially involve a dispute or controversy properly within the jurisdiction of said Circuit Court.’ “Before, therefore, a Circuit Court can be required to retain a cause under this jurisdiction, it must in some form appear upon the record, by a statement of facts, ‘in legal and logical form,’ such as is required in good pleading (1 Chit. PI. 213), that the suit is one which ‘really and substantially involves a dispute or controversy’ as to a right which depends upon the construction or effect of the Constitution, or some law or treaty, of the United States.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Filhiol v. Torney · Miller v. Illinois Cent. R.

3. ““Where, however, the original jurisdiction of a circuit court of the United States is invoked upon the sole ground that the determination of the suit depends upon some question of a federal nature, it must appear at the outset, from the declaration or the bill of the party suing, that the suit is of that character; in other words, it must appear in that class of cases that the suit was one of which the circuit court, at the time its jurisdiction is invoked, could properly take cognizance. If it does not so- appear, then the court, upon demurrer or motion, or upon its own inspection of the pleadings, must dismiss the suit, just as it would remand to the-state court a suit which the record, at the time of removal, failed to show was within the jurisdiction of the circuit court It cannot retain it in order to see whether the defendant may not raise some question of a federal nature, upon which the right of recovery will finally depend; and, if so retained, the‘want of jurisdiction-at the commencement of the suit is not cured by an answer or plea which may suggest a question of that kind.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cox v. Gilmer