Markert v. Swift & Co.’s Empirical Analysis
187 F.2d 104 · 1951
Citation profile
13
cited by 13 later decisions
June 1965
most recently cited
8 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Hurn v. Oursler · Strachman v. Palmer · Markert v. Swift & Co. · Manosky v. Bethlehem-Hingham Shipyard, Inc. · Crabb v. Welden Bros.
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The distinction to be observed is between a case where two distinct grounds in support of a single cause of action are alleged, one only of which presents a federal question, and a case where two separate and distinct causes of action are alleged, one only of which is federal in character. In the former, where the federal question averred is not plainly wanting in substance, the federal court, even though the federal ground be not established, may nevertheless retain and dispose of the case upon the nonfederal ground; in the latter it may not do so upon the nonfederal cause of action.””
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.