Texas Ry Co v. Cody’s Empirical Analysis
166 U.S. 606 · 1897
Citation profile
53 federal appellate · 33 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 167 later decisions (12 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1978 · most notably Great Northern Ry Co v. Alexander (1918), Minnesota v. Northern Securities Co. (1904)
53 federal appellate · 33 district · 22 state decisions — followed in 16 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Tennessee v. Union & Planters' Bank · Postal Telegraph Cable Co v. State of Alabama · Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. Myers · Continental Improvement Company v. Stead · Chappell v. Waterworth
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 167 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If in this case plaintiff had simply described defendant by its name, without more, there would seem to be no question that, as the corporation was judicially known to be a federal corporation, defendant would be entitled to remove the case on proper allegations in its petition; and we think this necessarily follows, where, by some mistake, or otherwise, the defendant is erroneously stated to be created under state laws.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is obvious that in the instance of diverse citizenship a different question is presented. Plaintiff may run his own risk in respect of the cause of action on which he proceeds, but he cannot cut off defendant’s constitutional right as a citizen of a different state than the plaintiff, to choose a federal forum, by omitting to aver, or mistakenly, or falsely, stating, the citizenship of the parties.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In the case at bar the pleader, either intentionally or by oversight, failed to describe the defendant Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Eailroad Company as a corporation created and existing under the laws of the United States;' but, 'whether. the omission was intentional or by oversight, no issue could be made as to the source of its corporate existence.””
2 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.