Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 162 U.S. 170 - Telfener v. Russ

Telfener v. Russ’s Empirical Analysis

162 U.S. 170 · 1896

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
June 1976
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1976 · most notably Coughran v. Bigelow (1896), Kauffman v. Raeder (1901)

14 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

90189619001910192019301940195019601970decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on The President Directors and Company of the Bank of Columbia v. Peter Hagner · Campbell v. Wade · Telfener v. Russ

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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It is admitted that the point is raised for the first time in this court. We have to determine in this appeal whether in our judgment the circuit court of appeals did or did not err, and affirm or reverse accordingly. It is true that our decision necessarily reviews the decree of the circuit court in reviewing the action of the court of appeals upon it, and under the statute our mandate goes to the circuit court directly; but it is, notwithstanding, the judgment of the circuit court of appeals that we are called upon primarily to review. It will be seen then that the judgments of the circuit court of appeals should not ordinarily be re-examined on the suggestion of error in that court in that it did not hold the action of the circuit court erroneous, which was not complained of. We will, however, make a few observations on the point thus tardily presented.””
    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.