Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 280 U.S. 406 - Davis v. Preston

Davis v. Preston’s Empirical Analysis

280 U.S. 406 · 1930

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
18
cited 18 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
December 1987
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions (18 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1987 · most notably Mosser v. Darrow (1951), Karcher v. May (1987)

15 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

210193019401950196019701980decided

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 Harry Smith v. State of Indiana · Dolan v. Jennings · Collins v. Blyth · Charles W. Castleman, a in Bankruptcy

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.

  1. ““A motion is now made by Andrew W. Mellon, as Federal Agent, for his substitution in the present proceeding in the place of Davis. But the motion must be denied. The succession in office, as now appears, occurred before there was any effort to obtain a review in this Court. After the succession Davis was completely separated from the office and without right to invoke such a review .... Therefore his petition must be disregarded. The time within which such a review may be invoked is limited by statute and that time has long since expired. To grant the motion in these circumstances would be to put aside the statutory limitation and to subject the party prevailing in the [court below] to uncertainty and vexation which the limitation is intended to prevent.” Id. at 408 . 4”
    2 later decisions 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.