Barcus v. Gates’s Empirical Analysis
89 F. 783 · 1898
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1999
5 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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.
Relationships
Relies on Central Transportation Co. v. Pullman's Palace Car Co. · Scovill v. Thayer · Parkersburg v. Brown · Handley v. Stutz · Sawyer v. Hoag
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A bill is not multifarious because there are several causes of action. If they grow out of the same transaction, and if all the defendants are interested in the same rights, and the relief against each is of the same general character, the bill may be sustained.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The complainants allege that this was all one scheme, of which the incorporating of the American Plant-Food Company was part. The allegations make it one continuous transaction, having one purpose.”
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.