McFadden v. Robinson’s Empirical Analysis
22 F. 10 · 1884
Citation profile
1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 1916
1 district ·
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 Gold-Washing and Water Company v. Keyes · Romie v. Casanova · McStay v. Friedman · City and County of San Francisco v. Scott
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The jurisdiction of this court, either by original process or by removal, in the class of eases under consideration, depends solely upon the fact that the controversy between the parties requires, for its final determination, the con struclion of some provision of the constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States, and tire appiieation thereof to the facts of the particular case, in such sense that the ruling thus made will materially affect the conclusion reached upon the controversy between the adversary parties to the litigation. Unless from the record it clearly appears that the federal question must be met and decided before the issue or issues in the particular cause can be finally disposed of, it cannot be said that the matter in dispute arises under the constitution or laws of the United States, within the meaning of the statute.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.