In re Hempstead’s Empirical Analysis
95 F. 967 · 1899
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
May 1902
most recently cited
1 federal appellate ·
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““As to the third question, that because the book was imported in unbound sheets it was not a book and, therefore, not entitled to free entry, it is not necessary to say more than that no such narrow definition of the word ‘book’ can be accepted by the Court. The statute itself does not undertake to make' any such distinction. The collected sheets containing in orderly and connected fashion the record of the intellectual and literary work of the author is a book unless for some particular and' special purpose a narrower definition is prescribed by law. The object of the statute was evidently to remove as far as possible obstructions to the freest possible circulation of the results of original scientific inquiry tending to the advancement of learning and the benefit of humanity.” 95 Fed. 967 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““410. Books, engravings, photographs, bound or unbound, etchings, music, maps and charts, which shall have been printed more than twenty years * *• * and all * * * scientific books and periodicals devoted to original scientific research,” etc.”
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.