Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 173 U.S. 587 - Duluth Co v. Roy

Duluth Co v. Roy’s Empirical Analysis

173 U.S. 587 · 1899

Citation profile

60
cited by 60 later decisions
7
cited 7 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
December 1981
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 60 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1981 · most notably Burke v. Southern Pacific Railroad (1914), Joseph Parker Camp v. Kate Willard Boyd (1913)

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 23 state decisions

2401899190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Williams v. Nottawa · Lee v. Johnson · Williams v. United States · Ard v. Brandon · Sparks v. Pierce

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

  1. “_ “That the claimant against patent must so far bring himself within the laws as to entitle him, if not obstructed or prevented, to complete his claim. It does not mean that at the moment of time the patent issued it should have been awarded to him. The facts performed by him may or may not have reached- that completeness, may not have reached it, and yet justify relief; as in Ard v. Brandon, 156 U. S. 537 (15 Sup. Ct. 406: 39 L. Ed. 524 ) and in Morrison v. Stalnaker, 104 U. S. 213 ( 26 L. Ed. 741 .) And because of the well-established principles that, where an individual in the prosecution of a right has done that which the law requires him to do, and he has failed to attain his right by the misconduct or neglect of a public officer, the law will protect him.””
    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.