Windsor v. McVeigh’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

116 federal appellate · 43 district · 348 state decisions

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

1. ““All courts, even tlie highest, are more or less limited in their jurisdiction.. * * * Though the court -may possess jurisdiction of a cause, of the subject-matter, and of the parties, it is still limited in its modes of procedure, and in the extent and character of its judgments. It must act judicially in all things, and cannot then transcend t.he power concurred by the law. ⅜ * ⅞ So a departure from established modes of procedure will often render the judgment void. ⅜ * * The decree oí a court of equity upon oral allegations, without written pleadings, would be an idle act, oí no force beyond that of an advisory proceeding of the chancellor. And the reason is that the courts are not authorized to exert their power in that.way.””

   18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Thomas v. American Freehold Land & Mortgage Co. of London, Ltd. · National Nickel Co. v. Nevada Nickel Syndicate, Ltd.

2. ““The order in effect denied the respondent a hearing. It is alleged he was in the position of an alien enemy, and could have no locus standi in that forum. If assailed there, he could defend there. The liability and right are inseparable. A different result would be a blot upon our jurisprudence and civilization. We cannot hesitate or doubt on the subject. It would be contrary to the first principles of the social compact and of the right administration of justice.” .”

   14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sabariego v. Maverick · Hovey v. Elliott

3. ““The doctrine invoked by counsel, that when a court has once acquired jurisdiction it has a right to decide every question which arises in the case, and its judgment, however erroneous, cannot be collaterally assailed, is undoubtedly correct as a general proposition, but it is subject to many qualifications in its application. It is only correct when the court proceeds, after acquiring jurisdiction of the cause, according to established modes governing the class to which the case belongs, and does not transcend in the extent or character of its judgment the law which is applicable to it.””

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hatch v. Ferguson · United States v. Meyer