Gunn v. Plant’s Empirical Analysis
94 U.S. 664 · 1876
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1937
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 Administrators of Ligon v. Rogers
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Bibb Supkutok Coukt, November term, 1866. Principal, §11,212. Interest to-. Whereupon it' is considered and adjudged by the court that the plaintiil do recover of the defendants, Thomas J. Woolfolk, James IT. Woolfolk, and John W. Woolfolk, the sum of §11,212 for his principal debt, and --dollars and-■ cents for interest to -, and the sum of-dollars and-cents for costs of suit, to be taxed by the clerk; and the defendant be in mercy, etc. N. H. Bass, Plaintiff's Attorney.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Plant v. Gunn
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.