Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 41 U.S. 303 - John Amis v. Nathan Smith

John Amis v. Nathan Smith’s Empirical Analysis

41 U.S. 303 · 1842

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
September 2009
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2009 · most notably Railroad Company v. National Bank (1880), Morley v. Lake Shore M S Ry Co (1892)

14 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

12018421850186018701880189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 MINOR v. the Mechanics Bank of Alexandria · Stuart v. Laird · Boyle v. Zacharie · Rossiter v. Chester

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

  1. ““If the forthcoming bond is applicable at all to the proceedings of the courts of the United States, it must be in the character of final process. * * v We think this section of the act of 1828, adopted the forthcoming bond in Mississippi as part of the final process of that state, at the passage of the act. And we understand by the phrase, ‘final process,’ all the writs of execution then in use in the state courts of Mississippi which were properly applicable to the courts, of ,the United States; and we understand the phrase, ‘the proceedings thereupon.’ to mean, the exercise of all the duties of the ministerial officers of the states, prescribed by the laws of the state, for the purpose of obtaining the fruits of judgments. And among those duties, is to be found one prescribed to tlio. sheriff, directing him to restore personal property levied on by him, to the defendant, upon his executing a forthcoming bond according to law, and the further duty to return it to the court forfeited, if the defendant fail to deliver the property on the day of sale, according to the condition of the bond. These are certainly proceedings upon an execution, and therefore the forthcoming bond must be regarded as part of the final process. It aids materially in securing the payment of the money to satisfy the judgment, and it is part of the process by which the plaintiff is enabled to obtain the payment of the money secured to him by the judgment. But is this forthcoming bond a judgment as well ”
    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.