Tilghman v. Werk’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 2 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A supplemental bill may also be filed, as well after as before a decree; and the bill, if after a decree, may be either in aid of the decree, that it may be carried fully into execution, or that proper directions may be given upon some matter omitted in the original bill, or not put in issue by it, or by the defense made to it. * * * But, where a supplemental bill is brought in aid of a decree, it is merely to carry out, and to give fuller effect to, that decree, and not to obtain relief of a different kind on a different principle; the latter being the province of a supplementary bill in the nature of a bill of review, which cannot be filed without the leave of the court.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Continental Oil Co. v. Osage Oil & Refining Co.

2. ““was based upon the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Mitchell v. Tilghman, 19 Wall. 287 [ 22 L. Ed. 125 ], holding the complainant’s patent to be invalid, and that subsequently, in the case of Tilghman v. Proctor [ 102 U. S. 707 , 26 L. Ed. 279 ], the Supreme Court had changed its ruling on said patent, holding the same to be valid, and that the decision in Mitchell v. Tilghman was erroneous.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Grier Bros. v. Baldwin