The Siren’s Empirical Analysis
74 U.S. 152 · 1868
Citation profile
66 federal appellate · 51 district · 25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 292 later decisions (63 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2019 · most notably Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida (1996), Bull v. United States (1935)
66 federal appellate · 51 district · 25 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 The Frances
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 292 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But, although direct suits cannot be maintained against the United States, or against their property, yet when the United States institute a suit they waive their exemption, so far as to allow the presentation by the defendant of set-offs, legal and equitable, to the extent of the demand made or property claimed, and when they proceed in rem they open to consideration all claims and equities in regard to the property libeled. They then stand in such proceedings, with reference to the rights of defendants or claimants, precisely as private suitors, except that they are exempt from costs and from affirmative relief against them, beyond the demand or property in controversy.””
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““As the United States are not suable of common right, the party who institutes such suit must bring his ease within the authority of some ’act of Congress, or the court cannot exercise jurisdiction over it.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In ease of wreck or salvage it is unquestionable tbat forfeiture would be superseded; and we see no ground on wbicb to preclude any other maritime claim, fairly and honestly acquired. We concur, then, in tlie opinion of the court, below that tbe fair claims of seamen and subsequent material men are not overreached by tbe previous forfeiture,” etc.”
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.