Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 61 U.S. 252 - The United States v. Gotlieb Breitling

The United States v. Gotlieb Breitling’s Empirical Analysis

61 U.S. 252 · 1857

Citation profile

180
cited by 180 later decisions
22
cited 22 times by the Supreme Court
16
states following
June 2014
most recently cited

94 federal appellate · 4 district · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 180 later decisions (22 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2014 · most notably Quercia v. United States (1933), Galloway v. United States (1943)

94 federal appellate · 4 district · 27 state decisions — followed in 16 states

36018571860187018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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.

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

  1. ““It is clearly error in a court to charge a jury upon a supposed or conjectural state of facts, of which no evidence has been offered. The instruction presupposes that there is some evidence before the jury which they may think sufficient to establish the facts hypothetically assumed in the opinion of the court; and if there is no evidence which they have a right to consider, then the charge does not aid them in coming to correct conclusions, but its tendency is to embarrass and mislead them. It may induce them to indulge in conjectures, instead of weighing the testimony.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““In the case before us the judge who tried the case has deemed it his duty to seal and certify the exceptions to this court, and, under the circumstances stated in the exception and the note, we think he was right in doing so, and that the exception is legally before this court as a part of the records of the proceedings of the court below.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The objection stated in the note is founded upon a rule of the Circuit Court, which in general, terms adopts the practice of the State courts; and the practice of the State courts, in relation to exceptions, is regulated by a law of the State, which provides that no bill of exceptions can be signed after the adjournment of the court during which the exception is taken, unless by consent of counsel in writing, when it may be signed within ten days thereafter, except in such cases as is otherwise provided. • “But the answer to this objection is, that the statute of Alabama, and the regulation it prescribes to the courts of the State, can have no influence on the practice of a court of the United States, unless adopted by a rule of the court. And it is always in the power of the court tp suspend its own rules, or to except a particular case from its operation, whenever the purposes of justice require 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.