Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 228 U.S. 364 - Slocum v. New York Life Insurance

Slocum v. New York Life Insurance’s Empirical Analysis

228 U.S. 364 · 1913

Citation profile

844
cited by 844 later decisions
69
cited 69 times by the Supreme Court
36
states following
April 2018
most recently cited

486 federal appellate · 51 district · 158 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 844 later decisions (69 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2018 · most notably Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore (1979), The Boeing Company v. Daniel C. Shipman (1969)

486 federal appellate · 51 district · 158 state decisions — followed in 36 states

282019131920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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

reviewedNew York Life Ins. v. Slocum (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Patton v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. · Capital Traction Co. v. Hof · Oscanyan v. Arms Co. · William Parsons v. Bedford Breedlove

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

  1. ““In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.””
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “* * * when, on the trial of the issues of fact in an action at law before a Federal court and a jury, the evidence, with all the inferences that justifiably could be drawn from it, does not constitute a sufficient basis for a verdict for the plaintiff or the defendant, as the case may be, so that such a verdict, if returned, would have to be set aside, the court may and should direct a verdict for the other party.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “One who deals with an agent, knowing that he is clothed with a circumscribed authority and that his act transcends his powers, cannot hold his principal; ...”
    3 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.