Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 202 U.S. 281 - Peter Pearson v. William Williams

Peter Pearson v. William Williams’s Empirical Analysis

202 U.S. 281 · 1906

Citation profile

178
cited by 178 later decisions
25
cited 25 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
March 2015
most recently cited

74 federal appellate · 14 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 178 later decisions (25 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2015 · most notably United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Co. (1966), Astoria Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Solimino (1991)

74 federal appellate · 14 district · 11 state decisions

260190619101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedPearson v. Williams (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Japanese Immigrant Case · Nishimura Ekiu v. United States · United States v. Ju Toy · Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Taggart · Lem Moon Sing v. United States

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

  1. ““ * * * The board Is an instrument of the executive power, not a court. It is made up, as we have mentioned, of the immigrant officials in the service, subordinates of the Commissioner of Immigration, whose duties are declared to be administrative by section 23. Decisions of a similar type long have been recognized as decisions of the executive department, and cannot constitute res judicata in a technical sense. * * * ””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Every alien who may not appear to the examining immigrant inspector at the port of arrival to be dearly and beyond a donbt entitled to land, shall be detained for examination in relation thereto by a board of special inquiry.””
    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.