Jones v. Montague’s Empirical Analysis
194 U.S. 147 · 1904
Citation profile
79 federal appellate · 11 district · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 193 later decisions (21 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2004 · most notably Southern Pacific Terminal Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission (1911), Poe v. Ullman (1961)
79 federal appellate · 11 district · 38 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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 Mills v. Green · Tennessee v. Condon · Codlin v. Kohlhausen · United States v. Hoffman
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 193 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the thing sought to be prohibited has been done, and cannot be undone by any order of court.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The duty of this court, as of every judicial tribunal, is limited to determining rights of persons or of property, which are actually controverted in the particular case before it. When, in determining such rights, it becomes necessary to give an opinion upon a question of law, that opinion may have weight as a precedent for future decisions. But the court is not empowered to decide moot questions or abstract propositions, or to declare, for the government of future cases, principles or rules of law which cannot affect the result as to the thing in issue in the case before it.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is obvious, therefore, that, even if the bill could properly be held to present a case within the jurisdiction of the circuit court, no relief within the scope of the bill could now be granted.” [Emphasis supplied.]”
2 later decisions 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.