Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 166 U.S. 661 - In re Chapman

In re Chapman’s Empirical Analysis

166 U.S. 661 · 1897

Citation profile

447
cited by 447 later decisions
53
cited 53 times by the Supreme Court
26
states following
August 2020
most recently cited

157 federal appellate · 53 district · 71 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 447 later decisions (53 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2020 · most notably United States v. Dixon (1993), Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad (1916)

157 federal appellate · 53 district · 71 state decisions — followed in 26 states

59018971900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on In re Debs · Kilbourn v. Thompson · Lau Ow Bew v. United States · Runkle v. United States

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

  1. “'[s]tatutes should receive a sensible construction, such as will effectuate legislative intention, and, if possible, so as to avoid an unjust or absurd conclusion.'”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The history of Congressional investigations demonstrates the difficulties under which the two houses have labored, respectively, in compelling unwilling witnesses to. disclose facts deemed essential to taking definitive action, and we quite agree with Chief Justice Alvey, delivering the opinion of the Court of Appeals, ‘that Congress possessed ' the ■ constitutional power to- enact a statute to enforce the attendance of witnesses and to compel them to make disclosure of evidence to enable the respective bodies to discharge their legitimate functions/ and that it was to effect this that the. act of 1857 was passed. It was an act necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested in Congress and in each house thereof.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Statutes should receive a sensible construction, such as will effectuate the legislative intention, and avoid, if possible an unjust or absurd construction.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.