Bourdieu v. Pacific Western Oil Co.’s Empirical Analysis
299 U.S. 65 · 1936
Citation profile
76 federal appellate · 18 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 165 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2002 · most notably Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. Patterson (1968), Napoletano v. CIGNA Healthcare of Connecticut, Inc. (1996)
76 federal appellate · 18 district · 13 state decisions
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
reviewedBourdieu v. Pacific Western Oil Co. (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Elmendorf v. Taylor · Russell v. Clark's Executors · Continental Mills, Inc. v. United States · Bourdieu v. Pacific Western Oil 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 165 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The rule is that if the merits of the cause may be determined without prejudice to the rights of necessary parties, absent and beyond the jurisdiction of the court, it will be done; and a court of equity will strain hard to reach that result. [Citing cases.]””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The rule is that if the merits of the cause may be determined without pre- ' judice to the rights of necessary parties, absent and beyond the jurisdiction of the court, it will be done; and a court of equity will strain hard to reach that result. West v. Randall, Fed.Cas. No. 17,424, 2 Mason 181, 196 (opinion by Mr. Justice Story); Cole Silver Mining Co. v. Virginia & G. H. W. Co., Fed.Cas. No. 2,990, 1 Sawy. 685, 689 (opinion by Mr. Justice Field); Story’s Equity Pleadings (8th Ed.) §§ 77, 96. And see Russell v. Clark’s Executors, 7 Cranch 69, 98 , 3 L.Ed. 271 ; Elmendorf v. Taylor, 10 Wheat. 152, 167, 168 , 6 L.Ed. 289 . Cf. Equity Rule 39. “We refer to the rule established by these authorities because it illustrates the diligence with which courts of equity will seek a way to adjudicate the merits of a case in the absence of interested parties that cannot be brought in.””
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.