Dudley v. . Mayhew’s Empirical Analysis
1849
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 5 district · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1949 · most notably Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad (1912), Claflin v. Houseman (1876)
1 federal appellate · 5 district · 36 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.
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If the offense, and consequently the right, which arises from the prohibition be new, no remedy or mode of prosecution can be pursued, except what is directed by the act. * * * If the act has prescribed the remedy for the party grieved, and the mode of prosecution, all other remedies and modes are excluded. * * * If the same act which creates the right, limits the time within which prosecutions for violations of it shall be commenced, that limitation cannot be dispensed with.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is very clear that when a party is confined to a statutory remedy, he must take it as it is conferred, and that where the enforcing tribunal is specified the designation forms a part of the remedy, and all others are excluded.””
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.