Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 17 U.S. 235 - Bank of Columbia v. Okely

Bank of Columbia v. Okely’s Empirical Analysis

17 U.S. 235 · 1819

Citation profile

219
cited by 219 later decisions
23
cited 23 times by the Supreme Court
28
states following
August 2022
most recently cited

47 federal appellate · 9 district · 82 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 219 later decisions (23 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2022 · most notably Daniels v. Williams (1986), County of Sacramento v. Lewis (1998)

47 federal appellate · 9 district · 82 state decisions — followed in 28 states

2301819182018301840185018601870188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Young v. The Bank of Alexandria

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

  1. “' "intended to secure the individual from the arbitrary exercise of the powers of government,”
    15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “But, to constitute particular tribunals for the adjustment of controversies among them, to submit themselves to the exercise of summary remedies, or to temporary privation of rights of the deepest interest, are among the common incidents of life. Such are submissions to arbitration; such are stipulation bonds, forthcoming bonds, and contracts of service. And it was with a view to the voluntary acquiescence of the individual, nay, the solicited submission to the law of the contract, that this remedy was given. By making the note negotiable at the bank of Columbia, the debtor chose his own jurisdiction; in consideration of the credit given him, he voluntarily relinquished his claims to the ordinary administration of justice, and placed himself only in the situation of an hypothecator of goods, with power to sell on default, or a stipulator in the admiralty, whose voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of that court subjects him to personal coercion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “This court would ponder long before it would sustain this action, if we could be persuaded that the act in question produced a total prostration- of the trial by jury, or even involved the defendant in circumstances Avhich rendered that right unavailing for his protection. But. a power is reserved to the judge, to make such rules and orders ‘ as that justice may be done; ’ and as the possession of judicial power imposes an obligation to exercise it, we flatter ourselves that, in practice, the evils so eloquently dilated on by the counsel do not exist. And if the defendant”
    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.