Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 217 U.S. 502 - Javierre v. Central Altagracia

Javierre v. Central Altagracia’s Empirical Analysis

217 U.S. 502 · 1910

Citation profile

136
cited by 136 later decisions
10
cited 10 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
October 2019
most recently cited

66 federal appellate · 20 district · 13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 136 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2019 · most notably Federal Trade Commission v. Morton Salt Co. (1948), McKelvey v. United States (1922)

66 federal appellate · 20 district · 13 state decisions

27019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 City of Walla Walla v. Walla Walla Water Co · United States v. Cook · Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburg Railway Co. · Joy v. City of St Louis · Marble Company v. Ripley

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

  1. ““There is a certain anomaly in granting the halfway relief of an injunction” against the breach of such a covenant “when the court is not prepared to enforce the performance to accomplish which indirectly is the only object of the negative decree.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a suit for damages would have given adequate relief, and therefore the appellee should have been confined to its remedy at law”
    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.