In Re Rice December 17 1894’s Empirical Analysis
155 U.S. 396 · 1894
Citation profile
45 federal appellate · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 165 later decisions (35 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1997 · most notably United States v. Mayer (1914), Ex parte Bakelite Corp. (1929)
45 federal appellate · 41 state decisions — followed in 12 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 Holland v. Challen · Galpin v. Page · Arndt v. Griggs · Smith v. Whitney · Frost v. Spitley
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 165 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘Where it appears that a court whose action is sought to be prohibited has clearly no jurisdiction of the cause originally, or of some collateral matter arising therein, a party who has objected to the jurisdiction at the outset, and has no other remedy, is entitled to a writ of prohibition as a matter of right. But where there is another legal remedy by appeal or otherwise, or where the question of the jurisdiction of the court is doubtful, or depends on facts which are not made matter of record, or where the application is made by a stranger, the granting or refusal of the writ is discretionary.’ ””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Alix · Barnes v. Lehi City“The writ cannot be issued to compel the court to decide a matter before it in a particular way,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“■“has clearly no jurisdiction of the suit or prosecution instituted before it, and the defendant therein has objected to its jurisdiction at the outset, and has no other remedy, he is entitled to a writ of prohibition as a matter of right.””
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.