Charles Wilkes v. Samuel Dinsman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

37 federal appellate · 8 district · 16 state decisions

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

1. ““Though marines are not in some senses seamen, and their duties are in some respects different, yet they are, while employed on hoard public vessels, persons in the naval service, persons subject, to the orders of naval officers, persons under the government of the naval code' as to punishment, and persons amenable to the Navy Department. Their very name of ‘marines’ indicates the place and nature of their duties generally. And, beside the analogies of their duties in other countries, their first creation here to serve on board ships expressly declared them to be a part of the crews of each of said ships. Act March 27, 1794, c. 32, § 4, 1 Stat 330. Their pay was also to be fixed in the same way as that of the seamen.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Dunn · In re Doyle

2. ““In respect to those compulsory duties, whether in re-enlisting or detaining on board, or in punishing or imprisoning on shore, while arduously en- ' deavoring to perform them in such a manner as might advance the science and commerce and glory of his country, rather than his own personal designs, a public officer, invested with certain discretionary powers, never has been, and never should be, made answerable for any injury, when acting within • the scope of his authority, and not influenced by malice, corruption, or cruelty. * * * The officer, being intrusted with a discretion for public purposes, is not to be punished for the exercise of it, unless it is first proved against him, either that he exercised the power confided to him in cases without his 'jurisdiction, or in a manner not confided to him, as, with malice, cruelty or willful oppression, or, in the words of Lord Mansfield, that he exercised it as if ‘ tlie heart is wrong.’ In short, it is not enough to show that he committed an error in judgment, but it must have been a malicious and willful error.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Clark · Cioca v. Rumsfeld

3. “It must not be lost sight of . . . that, while the chief agent of the government, in so important a trust, when conducting with skill, fidelity, and energy, is to be protected under mere errors of judgment in the discharge of his duties, yet he is not to be shielded from responsibility if he acts out of his authority or jurisdiction, or inflicts private injury either from malice, cruelty, or any species of oppression, founded on considerations independent of public ends. 58”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Stanley