Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 63 F.1d 204 - Walker v. Brown

Walker v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

63 F. 204 · 1894

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
November 1937
most recently cited

2 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1937

2 federal appellate ·

3018941900191019201930decided

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 Byers v. McAuley · Payne v. Hook · Hess v. Reynolds · Yonley v. Lavender · President of the Union Bank v. Vaiden

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

  1. ““On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered, adjudged, and decreed by this court that the decree of the said United States circuit court of appeals in this cause be, and the same is hereby, reversed, with costs, and that the said appellants recover against the appellees the sum of-for their costs. And it is further ordered that this cause be, and the same is hereby, remanded to the circuit court of the United States for the Southern district of Iowa for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion of this court. You therefore are hereby commanded that such execution and further proceedings be had in said cause, in conformity with the opinion and decree of this court, as, according to right and justice, and the laws of the United States, ought to be had, the said writ of certiorari notwithstanding.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The federal court erred in taking any action or making any decree looking to the mere administration of the estate, or in attempting to adjudicate the rights of citizens of the state as between themselves. The state court had proceeded so far as the administration of the estate carries it forward to the time when distribution may be had. In other words, the debts of the estate had been paid, and the estate was ready for distribution, but no adjudication had been made as to the distributees; and in that exigency the circuit court might entertain jurisdiction in favor of all citizens of other states, to determine and award their shares in the estate. Further than that it was not at liberty to go.””
    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.