Bryan v. Congdon’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

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

1. ““The established law lying at the foundation of this action is that if a person has been arrested and imprisoned under color of legal process, which is thereafter set aside for irregularity, the person who set the process in motion is responsible in damages to him upon whom the indignity and deprivation of liberty have been visited. Where the process is set aside for mere error committed by the court in the progress of the action, in contradistinction to irregular or void process, no-responsibility may attach to him who caused its issue; but, when it is vacated because it was irregular in its inception, responsibility at once attaches. ‘In the one case a man acts irregularly and improperly, without the sanction of any law, and he therefore takes the consequences of his own unauthorized act. But, where he relies on the judgment of a competent court, he is protected.’ * * * The whole doctrine is concisely summed up in Day v. Bach, 87 N. Y. 56 -60, and in Fischer v. Langbein, 103 N. Y. 84 , 8 N. E. 251 , substantially as follows: He who causes void or irregular process to be issued, whereby injury comes to another against whom it is enforced, is liable in damages therefor. Where the process is void, the right of action for the injury attaches when the wrong is committed, and no judgment vacating the process is required. * * * Void process is defined to be such as was issued without power in the court to award it, or which the court has not acquired jurisdiction to issue in the p”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Peters v. Malin

2. ““Void process is defined to be suc-li as was issued without power in the court to award it, or which the court has not acquired jurisdiction to issue in the particular case, or which fails in some material respect to comply with the (requisite form of legal process. Irregular process is such as a .court has general jurisdiction to issue, but which is unauthorized in the particular case by reason,of the existence' or nonexistence of some fact or circumstance rendering it improper in such a case.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jochem v. Cooley