Hilton v. Guyot’s Empirical Analysis
159 U.S. 113 · 1895
Citation profile
569 federal appellate · 249 district · 516 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 2,426 later decisions (45 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2024 · most notably Banco Nacional De Cuba v. Sabbatino (1964), Williams v. State of North Carolina (1945)
569 federal appellate · 249 district · 516 state decisions — followed in 45 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 United States v. Throckmorton · Marshall v. Holmes · Bank of Augusta v. Earle · Wisconsin v. Pelican Insurance
Cited together with Banco Nacional De Cuba v. Sabbatino · Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa · Hartford Fire Insurance Co v. California Merrett Underwriting Agency Management Limited · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Canada Southern Ry Co v. Gebhard Same
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 2,426 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the recognition which one nation allows within its territory to the legislative, executive or judicial acts of another nation, having due regard both to international duty and convenience, and to the rights of its own citizens or of other persons who are under the protection of its laws.”
144 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“there has been opportunity for a full and fair trial abroad before a court of competent jurisdiction, conducting the trial upon regular proceedings, after due citation or voluntary appearance of the defendant, and under a system of jurisprudence likely to secure an impartial administration of justice between the citizens of its own country and those of other countries, and there is nothing to show either prejudice in the court, or in the system of laws under which it was sitting, or fraud in procuring the judgment, or any other special reason why the comity of this nation should not allow it full effect....”
65 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It must, however, always be kept in mind that it is the paramount duty of the court before which any suit is brought to see to it that the parties have had a fair and impartial trial, before a final decision is rendered against either party.”
19 later decisions 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.