Prentice v. Duluth Storage & Forwarding Co.’s Empirical Analysis
58 F. 437 · 1893
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1987 · most notably Lawson v. United States Mining Co. (1907), Kelley v. Boettcher (1898)
17 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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 Holland v. Challen · Railway Company v. Whitton's Administrator · Ex parte McNiel · Meriwether Clark v. Andrew Smith · Reynolds v. First Nat Bank of Crawfordsville Indiana
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““That this suit was well and wisely brought admits of no discussion. Owners of lois in severalty, in possession under a common source of title, may join in a bill of peace to quiet their title, * * * the validity of which depends entirely upon the superiority of the title of their common grantor. The law and the facts which determine the validity of the title of one such owner also determine the validity of the title of every such owner. While they are owners in severalty, they are united in interest in the sole question at issue in such a case—the validity of the title of their common grantor. A suit based upon such a bill is of general equitable cognizance. It prevents a multiplicity of suits, and affords the only adequate remedy for such a multitude of several owners, * * * when their common source of title is assailed.””
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.