Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 431 F.2d 1215 - American Bank of Wage Claims v. Registry of District Court of Guam

American Bank of Wage Claims v. Registry of District Court of Guam’s Empirical Analysis

431 F.2d 1215 · 1970

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
3
states following
September 2005
most recently cited

46 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently September 2005 · most notably Treasure Salvors, Inc. v. Unidentified Wrecked & Abandoned Sailing Vessel (1978), United States v. An Article of Drug Consisting of 4,680 Pails (1984)

46 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

3401970198019902000decided

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 Lewis v. Reynolds · United States v. Ames · The Rio Grande · Compania Trasatlantica v. Manuel Arnus

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

  1. “[t]hus, where a vessel is the target of an in rem action in admiralty, it must both be within the territorial jurisdiction of [the] court hearing the cause and subject to the order of the court through [the] process of arrest. The proceeds from the judicial sale of a vessel, or security furnished in lieu thereof, are deemed a jurisdictional substitute for the vessel itself.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “remanded to the district court to recover the ‘res,’ that court would become entangled in an elaborate exercise in tracing, identifying, recovering and then redistributing any recovered monies, ... an effort caused solely by appellants' failure to take timely and legal steps to prevent the final disbursement. The district court is not now obligated so to act, nor are we inclined or required so to order it.” The court further stated that”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “It is axiomatic that in rem jurisdiction exists in an action only where the subject matter of the action, or an appropriate sub-substitute thereof, is within the jurisdiction of the court in which the action lies____ Thus, where a vessel is the target of an in rem action in admiralty, it must both be within the territorial jurisdiction of the court hearing the cause and subject to the order of the court through process of arrest.”
    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.