Appleby v. Cluss’s Empirical Analysis
160 F. 984 · 1908
Citation profile
1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently July 1945
1 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 American School of Magnetic Healing v. McAnnulty · Public Clearing House v. Coyne
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A due regard for an order of an executive department of the government demands that ihe judicial department shall not require the head of that executive department, or any of his subordinate officials, to answer a bill in equity, tiie purpose of which is to.secure a decree which in effect annuls the order, unless the bill makes a clear prima facie case that the facts adduced before the executive department could not possibly support (he order, or that the complainant's legal or constitutional rights have been violated.””
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.