Hapgood v. Berry’s Empirical Analysis
157 F. 807 · 1907
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 1936
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Kimberly v. Arms · Davis v. Schwartz · Kilbourn v. Sunderland · Kirby v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railroad · Parkersburg v. Brown
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If a defendant in a suit in equity answers and submits to the jurisdiction of the court, it is too late for him to object that the plaintiff has a plain and adequate rernedy at law. This objection should be taken at the earliest opportunity. The above rule must be taken with the qualification that it is competent for the court to grant the relief sought, and that it has jurisdiction of the subject-matter.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cobban v. Conklin““The want of jurisdiction, if relied on by the defendant, should have been alleged by plea or answer. It is too late to raise such an objection on the hearing in the appellate court, unless the want of jurisdiction is apparent on the face of the bill.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cobban v. Conklin
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.