Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 39 F.1d 204 - In re Reinitz

In re Reinitz’s Empirical Analysis

39 F. 204 · 1889

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
April 1991
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 1991

3 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

20188918901900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Royall · Ker v. People of the State of Illinois · United States v. Rauscher · Boardman v. Toffey · Mahon v. Justice

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

  1. ““This right [of extradition], the right to demand it, the obligation to grant it, the proceedings under which it takes place, all show that it is for a limited and defined purpose that the transfer is made. It is impossible to conceive of the exercise of jurisdiction in such a ease for any other purpose than that mentioned in the treaty, and ascertained by the proceedings under which the party is extradited, without an implication of fraud upon the rights of the party extradited and bad faith to the country which permitted his extradition. No such view of solemn public treaties between the great nations of the earth can be sustained by a tribunal called upon to give judicial construction to them.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The proceeding under the treaty is for a limited and defined purpose only, and * * * the exercise of jurisdiction over the prisoner for any other purpose than that mentioned in the treaty, until he has an opportunity to return, is * * * bad faith to the country which permitted the extradition.””
    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.