American Bell Tel. Co. v. Southern Tel. Co.’s Empirical Analysis
34 F. 803 · 1888
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 1928
3 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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 Tilghman v. Proctor · McCoy v. Nelson · Bogart v. Hinds · McMillin v. St. Louis & Miss. Valley Transp. Co. · Post v. T. C. Richards Hardware 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The weight of authority is that the profert of any recorded instrument is equivalent to annexing a copy 9 9 *; and if a party avers that he holds title to anything by á certain instrument which he annexes, and that instrument both grants the title and describes the full extent of the rights conferred, * * * it is equivalent to an averment that he has title to all the rights specifically described in such instrument””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Germain v. Wilgus
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.