Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 33 F.2d 667 - Harrison v. Triplex Gold Mines, Ltd.

Harrison v. Triplex Gold Mines, Ltd.’s Empirical Analysis

33 F.2d 667 · 1929

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
3
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently July 2016

6 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

401929193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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.

Relationships

Relies on Hilton v. Guyot · United States v. Throckmorton · Toledo Scale Co. v. Computing Scale Co. · Hollins v. Brierfield Coal & Iron Co. · Moffat v. United States

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

  1. “In any case to justify setting aside a decree for fraud, it must appear that the fraud practised, unmixed with any fault or negligence of the party complaining, prevented him from making a full and fair defense, and that the fraud complained of was not involved in, or presented to, the court of first instance either at the original trial or in a petition for review. This rule is universal. False testimony or fabricated documents are not sufficient to justify the interference of a court of equity, if they have been presented to the court determining the law and fact in the first instance. The reason for the rule is that there must be an end to litigation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““When citizens of this country engage in an enterprise in a foreign country with respect to property there situated, they subject themselves to the laws, decisions and decrees of its courts respecting such property and property rights.””
    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.