Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 97 U.S. 110 - Powder Company v. Burkhardt

Powder Company v. Burkhardt’s Empirical Analysis

97 U.S. 110 · 1877

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
14
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 9 district · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2019 · most notably Sturm v. Boker (1893), United States v. Eurodif S. A. (2009)

22 federal appellate · 9 district · 21 state decisions — followed in 14 states

170187718801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Norton v. . Woodruff · Foster v. . Pettibone · Mallory v. . Willis · Dittmar v. Norman

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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It is contended that the question of bailment or not is determined by the fact whether the identical article delivered to the manufacturer is to be returned to the party making the advance. Thus, where logs are delivered to be sawed into boards, or leather to be made into shoes, rags into paper, olives into oil, grapes into wine, wheat into flour, if the product of the identical articles delivered is to be returned to the original owner in a new form, it is said to be a bailment, and the title never vests in the manufacturer. If, on the other hand, the manufacturer is not bound to return the same wheat or flour or paper, but may deliver any other of equal value, it is said to be a sale or a loan, and the title to the thing delivered vests in the manufacturer. We understand this to be a correct exposition of the law.””
    3 later decisions 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.