Edward Prigg v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s Empirical Analysis
41 U.S. 539 · 1842
Citation profile
53 federal appellate · 25 district · 104 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 341 later decisions (76 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2023 · most notably Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York (1978), Hines v. Davidowitz (1941)
53 federal appellate · 25 district · 104 state decisions — followed in 30 states
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 Gibbons v. Ogden · Cohens v. Virginia · Brown v. Maryland · Fletcher v. Peck · Sturges v. Crowninshield
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 341 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A claim is a challenge by a man of the propriety or ownership of a thing, which he has not in possession, but which is wrongfully detained from him.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"If Congress have a constitutional power to regulate a particular subject, and they do actually regulate it in a given manner, and in a certain form, it cannot be that state legislatures have a right to interfere, and, as it were, by way of complement to the legislation of Congress, to prescribe additional regulations, and what they may deem auxiliary provisions for the same purpose. In such case, the legislation of Congress, in what it does prescribe, manifestly indicates that it does not intend that there shall be any farther legislation to act upon the subject matter. Its silence as to what it does not do, is as expressive of what its intention is as the direct provisions made by it."”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““A person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.””
4 later decisions 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.