Porter v. Cooke’s Empirical Analysis
58 F.2d 1033 · 1931
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently October 1965
3 federal appellate · 1 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 118
Relies on Central Trust Co. v. McGeorge · Toelke v. Toelke · Jones v. Gould · Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Louisville & N. R. · Levet v. Lapeyrollerie
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““However, this proceeding does not seek the establishment of an immediate title to or lien in favor of the complainants upon property within this district, but that the entity denominated a partnership first be declared to be the owner, that it be liquidated, and the residue divided between the petitioners and others, as their interests may appear. * * * the rights of the claimants * * * are eventual. They do not rest upon a title or lien upon any particular property existing at the filing of the suit, but upon results which flow from the courts having first exercised jurisdiction.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McNulty v. Heine
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.