The "Dove"’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 federal appellate · 19 district ·

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

1. ““Whether the controversy pending is a suit in equity or in admirality, a cross-libel, or libel is a bill or libel brought by a defendant in the suit against the plaintiff in the same suit or against other defendants in the original suit or against both, touching the matters in question in the original bill or libel. It ' is brought in the admirality to obtain full and complete relief to all parties as to the matters charged in the original libel; and in equity the cross bill is sometimes used to obtain a discovery of facts. “New and distinct matters, not included in the original bill or libel, should not be embraced in the cross suit, as they cannot be properly examined in such a suit, for the reason that they constitute the proper subject-matter of a new original bill or libel. Matters auxiliary to the case of action set forth in the original libel or bill may be included in the cross-suit, and no others, as the cross-suit is, in general, incidental to, and dependent upon, the original suit. Ayers v. Carter, 17 How. 595 [ 15 L. Ed. 179 ]; Field v. Schieffelin, 7 Johns. Ch. 252 ; Shields v. Barrow, 17 How. 145 [ 15 L. Ed. 158 ].””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bowker v. United States · Walton v. The Frank Gilmore

2. ““ * * * Whenever he desires to prefer such a claim, he should file an answer to the original libel, and institute a cross-action to recover the damages for the injuries sustained by his own vessel.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Mayer & Lage, Inc. v. Prince Line, Ltd.