Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 55 U.S. 52 - Wiswall v. Sampson

Wiswall v. Sampson’s Empirical Analysis

55 U.S. 52 · 1852

Citation profile

294
cited by 294 later decisions
22
cited 22 times by the Supreme Court
28
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

61 federal appellate · 44 district · 67 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 294 later decisions (22 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams (1983), Barton v. Barbour (1881)

61 federal appellate · 44 district · 67 state decisions — followed in 28 states

63018521860187018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Hagan v. Lucas · Smith v. McIver · Planters & Merchants' Bank of Mobile v. Walker · Forrest v. Camp

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

  1. “‘•It has boon argued that a sale of the ¡¡remises on execution and purchase occasioned no interference with the possession of the receiver, and hence no contempt of the authority of the court, and that the sale, therefore, in such a case, should be. upheld. But. conceding the proceedings did not disturb the possession of the receiver, the argument does not meet the. objection. The X>roperty is a fund in court, to abide the event of the litigation, and to be applied to the payment of the judgment creditor, who has hied his bill to remove Impediments in the way of his execution. If he has succeeded in establishing his right to the application of any portion of the fund, it is the duty of the court to see that such application is made; and, in order to effect this, the court must administer it independently of any rights acquired by third persons, pending the litigation. Otherwise, the whole fund may have passed out of its hands before the final decree, and the litigation become fruitless.””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'"As we have already said, it is sufficient, for the disposition of this case, to hold that while the estate is in the custody of the court as a fund to abide the result of a suit pending no sale of the property can take place, either on execution or otherwise, without the leave of the court for that purpose. And upon this ground we hold that the sale by the marshal on the two judgments was illegal and void, and passed no title to the purchaser.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““A party holding a judgment which is a prior lien upon the properly, the same as a mortgage, if desirous of enforcing it against the estate, after it has been 1akon into the care and custody of the court to abide ihe final determination of the iiligaiion. and pending that litigation, must first obtain leave of the court for this purpose. The court will direct a master to inquire into the circumstances, whether it is an existing, unsatisfied demand or as to the priority of the lien, etc., and take care that the fund he applied accordingly.””
    2 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.