Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 7 FCAS 418 - De Lovio v. Boit

De Lovio v. Boit’s Empirical Analysis

1815

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
February 2024
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 7 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2024 · most notably Victory Carriers, Inc. v. Law (1971), Atlantic Mutual Insurance v. Balfour Maclaine International Ltd. (1992)

7 federal appellate · 7 district ·

701815182018301840185018601870188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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

  1. “all contracts ... which relate to the navigation, business, or commerce of the sea,”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “On the other hand, in Sir Henry Constable's Case, 5 Coke, 106, etc., it was expressly adjudged, as has been already stated, that the soil, on which the sea ebbs and flows, may be parcel of a manor, and that, when the sea flows and has plenitudinem maris, the admiral shall have jurisdiction of every thing done on the water, between the high and low water mark, by the ordinary and natural course of the sea; and yet, when the sea ebbs, the land may belong to a subject, and every thing done on the land, when the sea is ebbed, shall be tried at common law, for it is then parcel of the country, and infra corpus comitatus; and so, between the high and low water mark, the common law and the admiralty have divisum imperium ... Until some strong reason can be assigned for a distinction, it would seem more conformable to law and nature to hold, that the bodies of counties, bounding on navigable waters, are limited at all times by the line of the sea tide; and this is the doctrine asserted by the admiralty.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “all those causes, which originally and inherently belonged to the admiralty” (emphases added)). The likely reason for this ambiguity is that the distinction between a”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.