Blount v. Windley’s Empirical Analysis
95 U.S. 173 · 1877
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 8 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2005 · most notably Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. (1949), Scott v. Armstrong (1892)
20 federal appellate · 8 district · 14 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 Simpson v. Huston · William Crawford and David Files v. The Branch Bank of Alabama at Mobile · 4 La. Ann. 157 - Pattison v. Edmonston
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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“mutual obligations [which] have grown out of the same transaction”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It may be said that this legislation is retroactive; and as applied to the case before us, it is so. But there is no constitutional inhibition against retrospective laws. Though generally distrusted, they are often beneficial and sometimes necessary. Where they violate no provisidn of the Constitution of the United States, there exists no power in this Court to declare them void.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is undoubtedly true, in some sense and for some purposes, that a judgment has been treated and considered as a contract; and we are not disposed to deny that the judgment in this case is evidence of a contract. But the judgment is only a contract because it is evidence of a debt or obligation on the part of defendant due to plaintiff. The judgment itself presupposes, and is founded on, some antecedent obligation or contract, because it now has the sanction of the judicial determination of its validity and the amount by a court of law. The essential nature and character of the contract remains unchanged.” (Emphasis added.)”
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.