Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 39 U.S. 51 - Francis West v. Walter Brashear

Francis West v. Walter Brashear’s Empirical Analysis

39 U.S. 51 · 1840

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
December 2017
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 6 district · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2017 · most notably In re Sanford Fork & Tool Co. (1895), Gaines v. Caldwell George G Latta Gaines (1893)

9 federal appellate · 6 district · 23 state decisions — followed in 11 states

120184018501860187018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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.

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

  1. ““The mandate of the supreme court to the circuit court must be its guide in executing the judgment or the decree on which it is issued. The mandate is the judgment of the supreme court transmitted to the circuit court; and where the direction contained in it is precise and unambiguous, it is the duty of the circuit court to carry it into execution, and not to look elsewhere for authority to change its meaning.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The mandate is the judgment of the Supreme Court, transmitted to the circuit court; and’ where the direction contained in it is precise and unambiguous, it is the duty of the circuit court to carry it into execution, and not to look elsewhere for authority to change its meaning. But when the circuit court are referred to testimony to ascertain the amount to be decreed, and are authorized to take more evidence on the point, it may sometimes happen that there will be some uncertainty and ambiguity in the mandate; and in such a case, the court below have unquestionably the right to resort to the opinion of the Supreme Court, delivered at the time of the decree, in order to assist them in expounding it.””
    1 later decision 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.