Carpenter v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
84 U.S. 489 · 1873
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1989 · most notably Wiggins Ferry Co. v. Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. (1892), Hill v. United States (1893)
6 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““No reason, however, for such an implication exists, when an express contract or an arrangement between the parties shows that it was not intended by them to constitute the relation of landlord and tenant, but that the occupation was taken and held for another purpose.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where the vendee under a contract for the sale and purchase of land enters into possession of the land before the conveyance of the title to him, and occupies the property under the contract, which is ultimately carried into effect, the law does not imply a promise upon the purchaser’s part to pay rent during the time of his occupation of the premises, and an action for use and occupation cannot be maintained against him. The circumstances of the occupancy repel any implication of a promise upon the vendee’s part to pay rent. The price agreed upon is presumed to be a sufficient consideration for the intermediate occupation of the land as well as the ultimate conveyance of title. The title of the purchaser, as far as his right to occupy is concerned, relates back to the time when he first took possession under his contract to purchase; or, as the rule is sometimes expressed, the previous tenancy is merged in the subsequent conveyance of the fee.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““When the defendant has entered and occupied by permission of the plaintiff without any express contract, the law implies a promise on his part to make compensation or pay a reasonable rent for his occupation.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cobb v. Kidd
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.