Whitney v. Wenman’s Empirical Analysis
198 U.S. 539 · 1905
Citation profile
146 federal appellate · 101 district · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 368 later decisions (38 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1997 · most notably Isaacs v. Hobbs Tie & Timber Co. (1931), Gardner v. State of New Jersey (1947)
146 federal appellate · 101 district · 17 state decisions
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 Mueller v. Nugent · Fred Bardes v. First National Bank of Hawarden Iowa · Louisville Trust Company v. Leonard Comingor · Frank Thompson v. Henry Fairbanks · Bryan v. Louis Bernheimer
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 368 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Nor can we perceive that it makes any difference that the jurisdiction is not sought to be asserted in a summary proceeding, but resort is had to an action in the nature of a plenary suit, wherein the parties can be fully heard after the due course of equitable procedure.””
18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Knopf · In re Cramond“It is insisted that in the present case the property was voluntarily turned over by the receiver, and thereby the jurisdiction of the district court, upon the ground herein stated, is defeated, as the property is no longer in the possession or subject to the control of the court. But the receiver had no power or authority, under the allegations of this bill, to turn over the property. He was appointed a temporary custodian, and it was his duty to hold possession of the property until the termination of the proceedings, or the appointment of a trustee for the bankrupt. The circumstances alleged in this bill tend to show that the transfer of the property was collusive, and certainly, if the allegations be true, it was made without authority of the court. The court had possession of the property, and jurisdiction to hear and determine the interests of those claiming a lien therein or ownership thereof. We do not think this jurisdiction can be ousted by a surrender of the property by the receiver, without authority of the court.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The bankruptcy court has jurisdiction of a proceeding in the nature of a plenary action brought by the trustee to determine controversies in relation to property held by tho bankrupt or by other parties for him, and the extent and character of liens thereon.””
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.