Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 314 U.S. 63 - City of Indianapolis v. Chase Nat Bank of City of New York

City of Indianapolis v. Chase Nat Bank of City of New York’s Empirical Analysis

314 U.S. 63 · 1941

Citation profile

1,288
cited by 1,288 later decisions
27
cited 27 times by the Supreme Court
9
states following
November 2022
most recently cited

366 federal appellate · 192 district · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,288 later decisions (27 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2022 · most notably Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger (1978), Koster v. Lumbermens Mut Casualty Co (1947)

366 federal appellate · 192 district · 26 state decisions

2010194119501960197019801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedChase Nat. Bank of City of New York v. Citizens Gas Co. of Indianapolis (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. · Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets · Strawbridge v. Curtiss · Healy Nh v. Ratta

Cited together with City of Dawson v. Columbia Avenue Saving Fund, Safe Deposit, Title & Trust Co. · Strawbridge v. Curtiss · Smith v. Sperling · Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger · Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets

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 1,288 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “look beyond the pleadings, and arrange the parties according to their sides in the dispute.”
    63 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The dominant note in the successive enactments of Congress relating to diversity jurisdiction is one . . . of relieving the federal courts of the overwhelming burden of 'business that intrinsically belongs to the state courts,' in order to keep them free for their distinctive federal business.”
    18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]his [was] the 'primary and controlling matter in dispute.' The rest [was] window-dressing designed to satisfy the requirements of diversity jurisdiction.”
    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.