Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 169 U.S. 39 - In Re Durrant

In Re Durrant’s Empirical Analysis

169 U.S. 39 · 1898

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
January 2020
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 4 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2020 · most notably Howard v. Fleming (1903), Rumford Chemical Works v. Hygienic Chemical Co. (1909)

18 federal appellate · 4 district · 9 state decisions

8018981900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Nishimura Ekiu v. United States · Spies v. Illinois · Kohl v. Lehlback · Andrews v. Swartz · James Hyatt v. People of the State of New York Charles E Corkran

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

  1. ““The object of the writ is to ascertain whether the prisoner applying for it can legally be detained, and it is the duty of the court, justice, or judge granting the writ, on hearing, ‘to dispose of the party as law and justice may require.’ ””
    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.