Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 36 F.1d 513 - Garrett v. New York Transit & Terminal Co.

Garrett v. New York Transit & Terminal Co.’s Empirical Analysis

36 F. 513 · 1888

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
September 1901
most recently cited

1 district ·

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

  1. ““Upon the argument of this motion for a preliminary Injunction, counsel for the complainant conceded that there was no -act which, being committed by the defendants, would be a contempt of the temporary injunction now asked for, that would not also be a contempt of the decree of the state court. It is also practically conceded . that the process of this court is sought only as ancillary to that of the state court. * * » Under these circumstances, the complainants should be left to their remedy in the state courts; and their morion for a temporary injunction must be denied.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.