Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 51 U.S. 56 - Shelby v. Bacon

Shelby v. Bacon’s Empirical Analysis

51 U.S. 56 · 1850

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
8
cited 8 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
June 1958
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1958 · most notably Princess Lida of Thurn & Taxis v. Thompson (1939), Riehle v. Margolies (1929)

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 9 state decisions

12018501860187018801890190019101920193019401950decided

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 Embree & Collins v. Hanna · Holmes v. Remsen

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

  1. ““But if the plea had been perfect in this respect it would not follow that the complainant could not invoke the jurisdiction of the circuit court. He, being a non-resident, has his option to bring his suit in that court, unless he has submitted, or is made a party in some form, to the special jurisdiction of the eourt of common pleas. It appears from the bill that the assignees have refused to allow the claim of the plaintiff, or any part of it. To establish this claim as against the assignees the complainant has a right to sue in the circuit court, which was established chiefly for the benefit of non-residents. Hot that the claim should thus be established by any novel principle of law or equity, but that his rights might be investigated free from any supposed local prejudice or unconstitutional legislation. On the most liberal construction favorable to the exercise of the special jurisdiction, the rights of the plaintiff in this respeetfcould not, against his consent, be drawn into it.””
    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.