Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 274 U.S. 614 - Stewart & Co. v. Rivara

Stewart & Co. v. Rivara’s Empirical Analysis

274 U.S. 614 · 1927

Citation profile

60
cited by 60 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
May 2006
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 8 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 60 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2006 · most notably Huron Portland Cement Company v. City of Detroit Michigan (1960), William R. McCorkle and Jeane D. McCorkle v. The First Pennsylvania Banking and Trust Company (1972)

22 federal appellate · 8 district · 8 state decisions

170192719301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Sherlock v. Alling · Gorieb v. Fox · Johnson v. Chicago & Pacific Elevator Co. · Isaac Smith Owner of the Sloop Volant v. The State of Maryland · Davis v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.

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

  1. “all questions of title pertaining to federally-enrolled ships and thereby have extended admiralty jurisdiction to encompass any case presenting such a question. The short answer to this contention is that the Supreme Court has expressly considered and unanimously rejected it: 8 [In providing for the enrollment of vessels,] Congress has not undertaken to regulate contracts for conditional sales of vessels * * *. It has not entered the field * * *. There is no foundation for the contention earnestly urged by plaintiff in error that Congress by these acts created”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Clearly there is nothing in the state law to interfere with the use of such vessels as instrumentalities of interstate commerce.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The Recording Act ( 9 Stat. 440 ) was passed to furnish information as to title and to protect bona fide purchasers. * * *”
    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.