In re Jones’s Empirical Analysis
97 F. 773 · 1899
Citation profile
1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently May 2008
1 district ·
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 Sellers v. Bell · Cunningham v. Brictson · Stewart v. McClung · Frazier v. Barnum · Heath v. Keyes
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.
““The bankruptcy act adopts the exemptions of the state statute, which includes their construction by the Supreme Court of-the state, and the rulings of that court are uniform in favor of the utmost liberality for such interpretation. Heath v. Keyes, 35 Wis. 668 , 672; Cunningham v. Brictson, 101 Wis. 378 , 383, 77 N. W. 740 . In the well-considered case of In re Steele, 2 Flip. 324 , Fed. Cas. No. 13,346, it is held that a watch usually carried upon the person of the debtor constitutes wearing apparel within the exemption statute; and this view is approved in Stewart v. McClung, 12 Or. 431 , 8 Pac. 447 , 53 Am. Rep. 374 , and in Brown v. Edmonds, 5 S. D. 508 , 59 N. W. 731 . Without attempting to review the authorities one way and the other upon this point, I am of opinion that such construction is in accord with the Wisconsin doctrine, and should be adopted here. * * * In reference to the ‘Masonic uniform,’ it appears to be owned for occasional wearing apparel, and the statute imposes no requirement of ‘ordinary and usual’ service. If so held in good faith, the exemption applies.””
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.