Arthur v. Lahey’s Empirical Analysis
96 U.S. 112 · 1877
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions (23 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1996 · most notably United States v. Stone & Downer Co. (1927), American Net & Twine Co. v. Worthington (1891)
5 federal appellate · 3 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 Smythe v. Fiske · Movius v. Arthur · Pennington v. Coxe · Homer v. The Collector
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the commercial designation of an article among traders and importers, where such designation is clearly established, fixes its character-for the purpose of the tariff laws; . . , a specific designation eo' nomine must prevail over general terms, and a commercial designation is the. standard by which the dutiable-character of the article is fixed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““When Congress has designated an article by its specific name, and imposed a ditty upon it by such name, general terms in a subsequent act, or in a later part of the same act, although sufficiently broad to comprehend such article, are not applicable to it.””
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.