Preston v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
26 F. 884 · 1886
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently May 1928
2 federal appellate · 2 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 Farrar v. Christy's Administrators · Smith v. Sweringen
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““I do not understand that a bill can be sustained solely for the sake of discovery; at least, that is the general rule. Indeed, bills of discovery are rarely, of late, resorted to.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“more like an effort to establish a doubtful title than a proceeding to protect from serious wrong a clear or adjudicated title”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Buder v. Franz“only upon an adjudicated or a clear title will a court of equity issue an injunction to restrain waste”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Buder v. Franz
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.