Doremus v. Root’s Empirical Analysis
94 F. 760 · 1899
Citation profile
1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently September 1951
1 district · 1 state decisions
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 Powers v. Chesapeake O Ry Co · Little v. Giles · Walker v. Collins · Atlantic & Pacific Railroad v. Laird · Warax v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co.
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(1) An action to recover unliquidated damages for a personal injury caused by negligence, although the negligence complained of amounts to a breach of contract on the part of the defendant, belongs to the class of cases denominated ‘actions ex delicto.’ The tort is the ground of action, and the law of torts must govern the case. In such a case the plaintiff may join several as defendants, and if upon the.trial he falls to sustain his complaint against all, but does sustain it against one of them, he may dismiss as to the others and recover against the one found to be liable. Railway Co. v. Laird, 164 U. S. 393 -403, 17 Sup. Ct. 120 , 41 L. Ed. 485 . “(2) In such an action against several defendants, sued as If they were jointly liable to the plaintiff, they must all meet the plaintiff upon the ground chosen by him; and, even though the complaint shows affirmatively that they have not acted jointly in such a manner as to incur a joint liability, still they cannot divide the cause, so as to present a separate controversy as to the separate acts of each. The defendants are not permitted to recast the Issues tendered by the complaint, so as to make several lawsuits in place of the one case which the plaintiff has elected to prosecute against them all jointly. Little v. Giles, 118 U. S. 596 -608, 7 Sup. Ct. 32 , 30 L. Ed. 269 . “(3) When the right to remove a case from a state court into a United States circuit court depends upon the nature of the controversy and the questions to”
1 later decision 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.