Lewis v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
244 U.S. 134 · 1917
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2014 · most notably Branch v. Smith (2003), In Re Komet (1989)
17 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
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
Relationships
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““§ 69. Extra services. No allowance or compensation shall be made to any officer or clerk, by reason of the discharge of duties which belong to any other officer or clerk in the same or any other department; and no allowance or compensation shall be made for any extra services whatever, which any officer or clerk may be required to perform, unless expressly authorized by law. (R.S. § 1764.) “§ 70. Extra allowances. No officer in any branch of tbe public service, or any other person whose salary, pay, or emoluments are fixed by law or regulations, shall receive any additional pay, extra allowance, or compensation, in any form whatever, for the disbursement of public money, or for any other service or duty whatever, unless the same is authorized by law, and the- appropriation therefor explicitly states that it is for such additional pay, extra allowance, or compensation. (R.S. § 1765.)””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We are of opinion that section 1765 of the Revised Statutes, * * * above quoted, prevents the allowance of the claim for fees. This section is general in its application, and fixes the compensation of officers of the United States at the salary established by law, unless the additional compensation is authorized and explicitly appropriated for.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re MacDonald“To enable the Secretary of the Interior to complete the unfinished drafting and field-note writing pertaining to surveys in the States of Minnesota, North Dakota, and Louisiana, caused by the discontinuance of the offices of the surveyors general in those States, six thousand five hundred dollars [is appropriated].”
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.