Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 297 U.S. 216 - Duparquet Huot & Moneuse Co. v. Evans

Duparquet Huot & Moneuse Co. v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis

297 U.S. 216 · 1936

Citation profile

297
cited by 297 later decisions
32
cited 32 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
February 2023
most recently cited

150 federal appellate · 12 district · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 297 later decisions (32 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2023 · most notably Mastro Plastics Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board (1956), Aaron v. Securities & Exchange Commission (1980)

150 federal appellate · 12 district · 24 state decisions

8501936194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Louisville Joint Stock Land Bank v. Radford · Continental Illinois Nat Bank Trust Co of Chicago v. Chicago R I & P Ry Co · Humphrey's Ex'r v. United States · Straton v. New · Metcalf Brothers Company v. Benjamin Barker Jr

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

  1. “There is need to keep in view * * the structure of the statute, and the relation, physical and logical, between its several parts.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(The words) came into the statute . . . freighted with the meaning imparted to them by the mischief to be remedied.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““A receivership in a foreclosure suit is limited and special. The rents and profits are impounded for the benefit of a particular mortgagee, to be applied upon the debt in the event of a deficiency. [Citations omitted.] * -* * There is neither winding up of the business nor attempt to reorganize it and set it going anew.” Duparquet Huot Co. v. Evans, 1936, 297 U.S. 216 , 221, 56 S.Ct. 412 , 414, 80 L.Ed. 591 . See also 1 Clark, Receivers, § 19.1 (3d ed. 1959).”
    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.