Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 92 U.S. 625 - Town of Concord v. Portsmouth Savings Bank

Town of Concord v. Portsmouth Savings Bank’s Empirical Analysis

92 U.S. 625 · 1875

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
15
cited 15 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
December 1951
most recently cited

2 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions (15 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1951 · most notably Ætna Life Insurance v. Middleport (1888), Pearsall v. Great Northern Railway Co. (1896)

2 district · 11 state decisions

190187518801890190019101920193019401950decided

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

  1. “«No county, city or town, township, or other municipality shall ever become subscriber to the capital stock of any railroad or private corporation, or make donation to or loan its ■credit in aid of such corporation: Provided, however, That the adoption of this article shall not be construed as affecting the right of any such municipality to make such subscriptions where the same have been authorized, under existing laws, by a vote of the people of such municipalities prior to such adoption.” 1 Charters and Constitutions, 191; 1 Starr & Curtis”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “no county, city, town, township, or other municipality shall ever become subscriber to the capital stock of any railroad or private corporation, or make donation to, or loan its credit in aid of, such corporation: Provided, however, that the adoption of this article shall not be construed as affecting the right of any such municipality to make such subscriptions where the same have been authorized, under existing laws, by a vote of the people of such municipalities prior to such adoption;”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.