Chase v. Driver’s Empirical Analysis
92 F. 780 · 1899
Citation profile
32 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently May 1981 · most notably Luther v. United States (1954), Knox Nat Farm Loan Ass'n v. Phillips (1937)
32 federal appellate ·
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 McGourkey v. Toledo & Ohio Central Railway Co. · St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railroad v. Southern Express Co. · Latta v. Kilbourn · Paulina Whiting v. The Bank of the United States · Central Trust Co. Of New York v. Grant Locomotive Works (Two Cases)
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But a decree which orders a judicial sale of specific property, under which the title may pass beyond the control of the court, is final; and it cannot be reviewed, unless it is challenged by a direct appeal from it, although it contains a provision referring the case to a master to state the account between the parties preparatory to the application of the proceeds of the sale, and to the adjudication of the costs. Ray v. Law, 3 Cranch, 179 [ 2 L. Ed. 404 ]; Whiting v. Bank, 13 Pet. 6 [ 10 L. Ed. 33 ]; Bronson v. Railroad Co., 2 Black, 524 [ 17 L. Ed. 347 ]; Michoud v. Girod, 4 How. 502 , 503 [ 11 L. Ed. 1076 ]; Sage v. Railroad Co., 96 U. S. 712 , 714 [ 24 L. Ed. 641 ] ; Bank v. Shedd, 121 U. S. 74 , 84, 85, 7 S. Ct. 807 [ 30 L. Ed. 877 ]. And an order which absolutely confirms a sale under such a decree is equally final, and subject to review by a direct appeal from it. Sage v. Railroad Co., 96 U. S. 712 , 714 [ 24 L. Ed. 641 ]; Blossom v. Railroad Co., 1 Wall. 655 [ 17 L. Ed. 673 ]; Butterfield v. Usher, 91 U. S. 246 [ 23 L. Ed. 318 ]. “The rule announced by the decisions last cited is so indispensable to the protection of the rights of litigants, and of the purchasers at judicial sales, and to a wise and just administration of the law, that it ought not to be questioned. If decrees of sale and orders of confirmation were subject to review until the last decrees upon all the accountings were entered, the uncertainty of the title to be obtained at the sales would deter pa”
2 later decisions 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.