Sarah Spratt v. Thomas Spratt’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 federal appellate · 20 district · 11 state decisions

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

1. ““submit tlie decision on the right oí aliens to admission as citizens to courts of record. They are to receive testimony, to compare it with the law, and i.o judge on both law and fact. This judgment is entered on record as the judgment of the court. It seems to us, if it be in legal form, to close all inquiry, and, like every other judgment, to be complete evidence of its own validity.’’”

   8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Schwimmer · United States v. Macintosh

2. ““An alien may be admitted to become a citizen of the United States in the following manner, and not otherwise.” i”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pintsch Compressing Co. v. Bergin · United States v. Spohrer

3. “‘■As James Spratt arrived within the United States after the passage of the act of 1802, he is embraced by the second section of that act, and was under the necessity of reporting himself to the clerk, as that section requires. Must this report be made five years before he can be admitted as a citizen? The law does not in terms require it. The third condition of the first section provides ‘that the court admitting such alien shall be satisfied that he has resided within the United States five years at least, but does not prescribe the testimony which shall be satisfactory. This section was in force when James Spratt was admitted to become a citizen, and was applicable to his case. But the second section requires, in addition, that he shall report himself in the maimer prescribed by that section, and requires that such report shall be exhibited, ‘on his application to be naturalized, as evidence of the time of his arrival within the United States.’ The law does not say that this report shall be the sole evidence, nor does it require that the alien shall report himself within any limited time after his arrival. Five years may intervene between his arrival and report, and yet the report will be valid. The report is undoubtedly conclusive evidence of the arrival, and must be so received by the court; but if the law intended to make it the only admissible evidence, and to exclude the proof which had been held sufficient, that intention ought to have been expressed. Yet the inferen”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Schmidt