Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 289 U.S. 137 - United States v. Flores

United States v. Flores’s Empirical Analysis

289 U.S. 137 · 1933

Citation profile

270
cited by 270 later decisions
13
cited 13 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
December 2017
most recently cited

122 federal appellate · 25 district · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 270 later decisions (13 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2017 · most notably Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co. (1959), Lauritzen v. Larsen (1953)

122 federal appellate · 25 district · 27 state decisions

690193319401950196019701980199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 102

Relies on Crowell v. Benson · Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen · Panama Co v. Johnson · United States v. Wiltberger · Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Stewart

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

  1. ““ ‘And so by comity it came to be generally understood among civilized nations that all matters of discipline, and all things done on board, which affected only the vessel, or those belonging to her, and did not involve the peace or dignity of the country, or the tranquility of the port, should be left by the local government to be dealt with by the authorities of the nation to which the vessel belonged as the laws of that nation, or the interests of its commerce should require.’ ””
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Perhaps the most venerable and universal rule of maritime law ... is that which gives cardinal importance to the law of the flag ... This Court has said that the law of the flag supersedes the territorial principle, even for purposes of criminal jurisdiction of personnel of a merchant ship because ... [the ship] “is deemed to be a part of the territory of the sovereignty [whose flag it flies], and not to lose that character when in navigable waters within the territorial limits of another sovereignty.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(t)o define and punish . . . Offences against the law of Nations.”
    4 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.