Sowell v. Federal Reserve Bank’s Empirical Analysis
268 U.S. 449 · 1925
Citation profile
50 federal appellate · 9 district · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 230 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2017 · most notably National Mut Ins Co of District of Columbia v. Tidewater Transfer Co Inc (1949), Meyer v. United States (1963)
50 federal appellate · 9 district · 31 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
reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Bank of the United States v. Planters' Bank · American Bank & Trust Co. v. Federal Reserve Bank · Henry Wyman v. Sumner Wallace · Bankers Trust Company v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company
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 230 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“rests upon the principle that a creditor having two funds to satisfy his debt may not, by his application of them to his demand, defeat another creditor, who may resort to only one of the funds.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We thing that a reasonable interpretation of the language of the clause in the light of its history, its obvious purpose at the time of its enactment, and judicial declarations as to its meaning and effect, and the fact that the provision for jurisdiction generally over suits arising under the laws of the United' States was enacted later, and without any exceptions, lead to the conclusion that it should be so applied as not to limit jurisdiction arising from the nature of the subject-matter of the suit, as is the case in suits brought by or against corporations organized under the laws of the United States.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““No district court shall have cognizance of any suit (except upon foreign bills of exchange) to recover upon any promissory note or other chose in action in favor of any assignee, or of any subsequent holder if such instrument be payable to bearer and be not made by any corporation, unless such suit might have been prosecuted in such court to recover upon said note or other chose in action if no assignment had been made. * * * ””
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.