Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 93 U.S. 548 - STANTON v. Embrey, Administrator

STANTON v. Embrey, Administrator’s Empirical Analysis

93 U.S. 548 · 1877

Citation profile

461
cited by 461 later decisions
28
cited 28 times by the Supreme Court
35
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

171 federal appellate · 31 district · 104 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 461 later decisions (28 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2019 · most notably Kline v. Burke Construction Co. (1922), Old Colony Trust Co. v. Commissioner (1929)

171 federal appellate · 31 district · 104 state decisions — followed in 35 states

960187718801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Muller et al. v. Ehlers · Wylie v. Coxe · Thompson v. Riggs · Hatch v. Spofford

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

  1. ““Professional services, to prepare and advocate just claims for compensation, are as legitimate as services rendered in court in arguing a cause to convince a court or jury that the claim presented or the defense set up against a claim presented by the other party ought to be allowed or rejected. Parties in such cases require advocates; and the legal profession must have a right to accept such employment, and to receive compensation _ for their services; nor can courts of justice adjudge such contracts illegal, if they are free from any taint of fraud, misrepresentation, or unfairness.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ Still it is insisted by the defendant in error that the pendency of a prior suit in another jurisdiction is not a bar to a subsequent suit in a circuit court, or in the court below, even though the two suits are for the same cause of action, and the court, here concurs in that proposition, liepeated attempts to maintain the negative of that proposition have been made, and it must be admitted that such attempts have been successful in a few jurisdictions; but the great weight of authority is the other way.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Where an attorney in the exercise of his ordinary labor and calling, and with the instrumentalities of his professional learning and industry, undertakes to work out a desired result 'for his client, not through personal influence, but through the instrumentalities of the law — by persuasion, as ‘distinguished from influence — such an undertaking is not an unlawful one, or contrary to public policy.””
    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.