Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 75 F.1d 742 - Grether v. Wright

Grether v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis

75 F. 742 · 1896

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
8
cited 8 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
October 1985
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1985 · most notably National Mut Ins Co of District of Columbia v. Tidewater Transfer Co Inc (1949), O'Donoghue v. United States (1933)

13 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions

1101896190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 M'Culloch v. State of Maryland · Osborn v. President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States · Cohens v. Virginia · John Den James Murray and John Kayser v. The Hoboken Land and Improvement Company John Den James B Murray et al. · Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.

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

  1. ““Complainants except to that portion of said answer which is embraced in the ninth paragraph thereof upon the ground that the same is insufficient. The portion of the bill of complaint which the defendant undertakes to answer by said ninth paragraph is contained in paragraph 8 of the bill of complaint, and is as follows: ‘The Supreme Court of the United States having decided that the railroads aforesaid were exempt from a property tax including a so-called “franchise tax” and that the legislation of the state of Georgia which sought to impose a tax thereon was unconstitutional, null and void, nevertheless the defendant, having failed in his persistent effort to collect taxes from the owner of the property, the Georgia Railroad • & Banking Company, is now seeking to levy the same taxes on the same property in the hands of the tenant of the owner, to wit, your orators as lessees, and to force your orators to pay the same.’ “Said answer to paragraph 8 as embodied in paragraph 9 of the answer is as follows: ‘It is true that litigation with the Georgia Railroad & Banking Company over said taxes for 1903 resulted in a decree of this court, affirmed save as to the Washington Branch by the Supreme Court of the United States, which restrained respondent from collecting from said Georgia Railroad & Banking Company ad valorem taxes on the railroad from Augusta to Atlanta, and from Union Point to Athens, in so far as the same represented investments of the stock of said company which is ”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““This court has held in a multitude of eases that where the laws of a particular state gave a remedy in equity, as, for instance, a hill hy a party in or out of possession to quiet title to lands, such remedy would he enforced in the federal courts, if it did not infringe upon the constitutional rights of the parties to a trial by jury.” Greeley v. Lowe, 155 U. S. 58 , 75, 15 Sup. Ct. 28 , 39 L. Ed. 75 .”
    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.