United States v. Dashiel’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 federal appellate · 1 district · 30 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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Partial satisfaction of a judgment, whether obtained by a levy or voluntary payment, is not, and never was, a bar to a writ of error, where it appeared that the levy was made or the payment was received prior to the-service of the writ, and there is no well-considered case which affords the-slightest support to any such proposition. Subsequent payment, unless in» full, would have no greater effect; but it is unnecessary to examine that' point, as np such question is presented for decision. Where the alleged satisfaction is not in full, and was obtained prior to the allowance of the writ of error, the authorities are unanimous that it does not impair the right of the plaintiff to prosecute the writ, and it is only necessary to refer to a standard writer upon the subject to show that the rule as here stated has-prevailed in the parent country from a very early period in the history of her jurisprudence to the present time.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Snow v. Hazlewood

2. ““I think this writ of error ought to be dismissed. The plaintiff, having .elected to take execution and satisfy his judgment, has no longer any judgment upon which the writ can operate. His election to accept and execute his judgment below is ‘retraxit’ of his writ of error. Such has been the unanimous decision of every court of law that has passed on the question. Appeals in chancery can furnish no precedent for a contrary decision. A decree in chancery may have a dozen different parts, some of which may stand good and be executed, while others may be litigated on appeal. A judgment at law is one thing. The plaintiff cannot divide his claim into parts, and when he obtains judgment for part accept that part and prosecute his suit for more. Having a right to elect to pursue his judgment or his writ of error, he cannot elect to have both.” U. S. v. Dashiel, 3 Wall. 688 (70 U. S.) 18 L. Ed. 268 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Ingram v. Groves