Hyde v. Minerals Separation, Ltd.’s Empirical Analysis
214 F. 100 · 1914
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
January 1929
most recently cited
4 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Appellate journey
Relationships
Relies on McClain v. Ortmayer · Tilghman v. Proctor · Dolbear v. American Bell Telephone Co. · Roberts v. Ryer · Northern Pacific Railroad v. O' Brien
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The 7i6)-ei»-clescribad process oí concentrating ores, which consists in mixing the powdered ore with water, adding a small proportion of an oily liquid having a preferential affinity for metalliferous matter ("amounting to a l'ractioia of one per cent, on the ore), agitating the mixture until the oil-eoatéd mineral matter forms into a froth, and separating the froth from the remainder by Potation.””
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.