Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 5 E.H. Smith 172 - Davis v. . Cornue

5 E.H. Smith 172 - Davis v. . Cornue’s Empirical Analysis

1896

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
2
states following
August 2016
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently August 2016

2 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

401896190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Dobson v. . Pearce · Stevens v. Central National Bank of Boston · Belden v. Woodmansee

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

  1. “In such a case these courts act upon an acknowledged principle of public law in regard to jurisdiction. They do not pretend to direct or control the foreign court, but without regard to the situation of the subject-matter of the dispute, they consider the equities between the parties and decree in personam according to those.equities and enforce obedience to their decrees by process in per-sonam.... This is the acknowledged rule in England and in this country....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Although the courts of one country have no authority to stay proceedings in the courts of another, they have undoubted authority to control all persons and things within their own territorial limits. When ... both parties to a suit in a foreign country are residents within the territorial limits of another country, the courts of equity in the latter country may act in personam upon those parties and direct them by injunction to proceed no further in such suit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““We are oí the opinion that the court hacl jurisdiction and authority to award a judgment against the defendants in personam, restraining them from receiving and dissipating the funds tielonging to the estate of Andrew J. Davis, and that the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.””
    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.