Underhill v. Hernandez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

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

1. ““Conditions of comity and of the highest, expediency require that the conduct of states, whether in transactions with other states or with individuals, their own citizens, or foreign citizens, should not be called in question by the legal tribunals of any other jurisdiction. The citizens of a state have an adequate redress for any grievance at its hands by an appeal to the courts or the other departments of their own government. Foreign citizens can rely upon the intervention of their respective governments to redress their wrongs even by a resort, if necessary, to the arbitrament of war. It would be not only offensive and unnecessary, but it would imperil the amicable relations between governments and vex the peace of nations, to permit the sovereign acts or political transactions of states to be subjected to the examination of the legal tribunals of other states.””

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Oetjen v. Central Leather Co. · American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co.

2. “[T]he acts of the official representatives of the state are those of the state itself, when exercised within the scope of their delegated powers[.]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 453 N.J. Super. 526 - Ben-Haim v. Edri · Menendez v. Saks