Henry Wheaton v. Richard Peters’s Empirical Analysis
33 U.S. 591 · 1834
Citation profile
94 federal appellate · 23 district · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 310 later decisions (51 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2025 · most notably D'Oench, Duhme & Co. v. Federal Deposit Insurance (1942), Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen (1917)
94 federal appellate · 23 district · 30 state decisions — followed in 16 states
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 United States v. Vaughan · Morris's Lessee v. Vanderen · Kley v. Geiger · Nichols v. Ruggles
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 310 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But if the common-law right of authors were shown to exist in England, does the same right exist, and to the same extent, in this country? It is clear there can be no common law of the United States. The federal government is composed of twenty-four sovereign and independent states; each of which may have its local usages, customs, and common law. There is no principle which pervades the Union and has the authority of law that is not embodied in the Constitution or laws of the Union. The common law could be made a part of our federal system only by legislative adoption. The question respecting the literary property of authors was not made a subject of judicial investigation in England until 1760; and no decision was given until the case of Miller v. Taylor was decided in 1769. Long before this time the colony of Pennsylvania was settled. What part of the common Jaw did Penn and his associates bring with them from England? The literary property of authors, as now asserted, was then unknown in that country. Laws had been passed regulating the publication of new works under license. And the King, as the head of the church and the state,’ claimed the exclusive right of publishing the acts of Parliament, the book of common prayer, and a few other books. No such right at the common law had been recognized in England when the colony of Penn was organized. Long afterwards literary property became a subject of controversy, but the question was involved in great doubt and perplexity ;”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘•Congress, then, by this ad, instead of sanctioning an existing right, as contended for. created it.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“no reporter ... can have any copyright in the written opinions delivered by this court”
5 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.