Williams v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate ·

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

1. ““In setting aside a fraudulent release of its own judgment, the law court is, as has been said, exercising an equitable power. The relief is usually granted on motion. A jury could not be demanded as of right on such a trial. 1 Freeman on Executions (3d Ed.) § 54; 3 Freeman, § 361, p. 2048; Wilson v. Stilwell, 14 Ohio St. 464 , 468; Laughlin v. Fairbanks, 8 Mo. 367 , 370; Anderson v. Carlisle, 7 How. (Miss.) 408; Morton v. Walker, 7 How. (Miss.) 554; Union Pacific R. Co. v. Syas, 246 Fed. 561 , 158 C. C. A. 531 . There are many powers of the law courts which have been immemorially exercised without the aid of a jury. Trials on habeas' corpus, contempt, mandamus, and prohibition are-such. The equitable powers of law courts over their own judgments, illustrated by orders in respect to the execution of writs of possession, are also, as I believe, always exercised without a jury. The power that the law court has to set aside a fraudulent release of its judgment is founded on its control of its own records, or control of its own processes. Because in exercising this power it administers a relief which is equitable in nature, it seems tome to follow that no jury trial of the issue could be required. If the court were to lay such issue before a jury the verdict (as on an issue out of chancery) would be advisory only. I do not contend, of course, that an issue as to-the validity of a release of a judgment (especially if not under seal) might not be so presented in a court of law as t”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Miller v. Williams