Rich v. Braxton’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

28 federal appellate · 13 district · 35 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 111 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Upon the question of the jurisdiction of a court of equity to give the relief sought by the bill, but little need to bo said. In Simpson v. Edmiston, 23 W. Va. 675 , 678, the court said that it had been repeatedly held that a court of equity has jurisdiction to set aside an illegal tax deed; citing Forqueran v. Donnally, 7 W. Va. 114 , Jones v. Dils, 18 W. Va. 759 , and Orr v. Wiley, 19 W. Va. 150 . And in Danser v. Johnsons, 25 W. Va. 380 , 387, ‘It is fully settled in this state that a court of equity has jurisdiction to set aside a void tax deed.’ These authorivirs make it dear that, if this case had remained in the state court, no objection could have been made to the form of the suit. But as the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States sitting in equity cannot be controlled by the laws of the states or the decisions of the slate courts (except that the courts of the United States sitting in equity may enforce new right s of an equitable nature created by such laws, — Clark v. Smith, 13 Pet. 195 ; Holland v. Challen, 110 U. S. 15 , 3 Sup. Ct. 495 ), it is proper to^say that, according to settled principles, the plaintiffs were entitled to invoke the aid of a court of equity.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Davidson v. Calkins

2. “"In the present case there are no defects of a controlling' character that distinctly appear on the face of the tax deeds under which the defendants claim Title; and as those deeds are made by statute prima facie evidence of title in the grantees named in them, and as, therefore, the plaintiffs, if sued in ejectment by the defendants, would be compelled, in order to defeat recovery against them, to resort to extrinsic evidence in support of their title, the deeds in question constitute a cloud upon that title, to remove which the plaintiffs may rightly invoice the aid of a court of equity.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ritchie v. Sayers

3. ““This court has often been called upon to consider the sixteenth section of the judiciary act of 1789, and as often, either expressly or by the course of its decisions, has held that it is merely declaratory, making no alteration whatever in the rules of equity on the subject of legal remedy. It is not enough that there is a remedy at law. It must be plain and adequate, or, in other words, as practical and efficient to the ends of justice and its prompt administration as the remedy in equity.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Twin City Power Co. v. Barrett