Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 U.S. 303 - Rounds v. Cloverport Foundry & Machine Co.

Rounds v. Cloverport Foundry & Machine Co.’s Empirical Analysis

237 U.S. 303 · 1915

Citation profile

123
cited by 123 later decisions
30
cited 30 times by the Supreme Court
9
states following
April 2013
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 27 district · 37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 123 later decisions (30 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2013 · most notably Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973), Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen (1917)

12 federal appellate · 27 district · 37 state decisions

30019151920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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

reviewedRounds v. Cloverport Foundry & Machine Co.

Relationships

Relies on Cohens v. Virginia · Atlantic Transport Company of West Virginia v. Frank Imbrovek · St Louis Iron Mountain Southern Railway Company v. May Taylor W · The J. E. Rumbell · James L. v. Carryl

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

  1. ““If * * * ttie cause of action be not one of which a court of admiralty has jurisdiction, or if the suit be in personam against an individual defendant, with an auxiliary attachment against a particular thing, or against the property of the defendant in general, it is essentially a proceeding according to the course of the common law, and within the saving clause of the statute (section 563) of a common-law remedy.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The proceeding in rem which is within the exclusive jurisdiction of admiralty is one essentially against the vessel itself as the debtor or offending thing, — in which the vessel is itself ‘ seized and' impleaded as the defendant, and is judgecLand sentenced accordingly.’”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[slinee the common law is competent in all cases where the suit is in personam, a plaintiff in such causes may elect either to proceed in admiralty or to bring an ordinary civil action, either at law in state court or in a federal district court”
    2 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.