Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 82 U.S. 36 - Smoot's Case

Smoot's Case’s Empirical Analysis

82 U.S. 36 · 1872

Citation profile

161
cited by 161 later decisions
26
cited 26 times by the Supreme Court
17
states following
September 2014
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 6 district · 58 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 161 later decisions (26 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2014 · most notably Lynch v. United States (1934), Keene Corp. v. United States (1993)

27 federal appellate · 6 district · 58 state decisions — followed in 17 states

250187218801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 John Griffin

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

  1. ““A mere assertion that the party will be unable or will refuse to perform hig contract is not sufficient. It must he a distinct and unequivocal absolute refusal to perform the promise, and must be treated and acted upon as such by the party to whom the promise was made; for, if he afterwards continue to urge or demand a compliance with the contract, it is plain that he docs not understand it to be at an end.””
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'proper theater' for such arguments ... 'is the halls of Congress, for that branch of the government has limited the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims’”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““In approaching the inquiry into the effect which the action of the burean of cavalry, in adopting these new rules for inspection, had upon the rights of’ the parties to this contract, let us endeavor to free ourselves from the consideration that the government was one party to the contract, and that it was fox-si large number of horses: for we hold it to be clear that the principles which, must govern the inquiry are the same as if the contract were between Individ-dais, and the number of horses one or a dozen instead of four thousand.””
    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.