Robb v. Vos’s Empirical Analysis
155 U.S. 13 · 1894
Citation profile
125 federal appellate · 20 district · 61 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 265 later decisions (12 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2011 · most notably Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co. (1944), United States v. Beebe (1901)
125 federal appellate · 20 district · 61 state decisions — followed in 24 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 Pennoyer v. Neff · Smith v. Ayer · Oelrichs v. Spain · Johnson v. Waters
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 265 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A man may not take contradictory positions; and where lie has a right to choose one of two modes of redress, and the two are so inconsistent that the assertion of one involves the negation or repudiation of the other, his deliberate and settled choice of one; with knowledge, or the means of knowledge of such facts as would authorize a resort to each, will preclude him thereafter from going back and electing again.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“one of the most unequivocal methods of showing ratification of an agent's act is the bringing of an action based upon such an act.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““As the proceedings in the Gugenheim Case were regular upon their face, and extrinsic evidence was required to show their invalidity, we think a court of equity was the proper tribunal to afford effectual relief. Slater v. Maxwell, 6 Wall. 268 [ 18 L. Ed. 796 ]; Cocks v. Izard, 7 Wall. 359 [ 19 L. Ed. 275 ]; Oelrichs v. Spain, 15 Wall. 211 , 228 [ 21 L. Ed. 43 ]; Freeman on Judgments, §§ 449, 500. Nor do we think that the contention that for the Circuit Court of the United States to grant such relief would be to interfere with the jurisdiction of the state court, is well founded. Pennover v. Neff, 95 U. S. 714 [ 24 L. Ed. 565 ]; Johnson v. Waters, 111 U. S. 640 [ 4 Sup. Ct. 619 , 28 L. Ed. 547 ]; Arrowsmith v. Gleason, 129 U. S. 86 [ 9 Sup. Ct. 237 , 32 L. Ed. 630 ].””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McFarland v. Curtin
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.