SPRAGUE v. TICONIC NATIONAL BANK Et Al.

1939-04-24 · Supreme Court of the United States · United States

2What it rests on

12Relied on since

0Departed from

Relied on since

The judgments that cite this one. This is the answer that tells you the case is still alive.

+5 earlier19701 judgments19721 judgments19732 judgments19751 judgments16 years silent19911 judgments5 years silent19961 judgments

12 judgments have relied on it, across 1940–1996

first 1940 · last 1996 · busiest 1973 (2 judgments)

1996-08-26Edward O. GOODRICH, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. E.F. HUTTON GROUP, INC., and E.F. Hutton Group & Company, Inc., Defendants Below, AppelleesSupreme Court of Delaware 1991-08-02Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States 1975-05-12Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness Society Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1973-05-21HALL Et Al. v. COLESupreme Court of the United States 1973-05-09Gustave GERSTLE Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellees (Cross-Appellants), v. GAMBLE-SKOGMO, INC., Defendant-Appellant (Cross-Appellee)Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit×3 1972-03-24NAACP, Plaintiff, Phillip Paradise, Jr., Individually and on Behalf of the Class Similarly Situated, Intervening Plaintiff, United States of America, Plaintiff and Amicus Curiae, v. Walter L. ALLEN, as Director of the Alabama Department of Public Safety, His Agents, Assigns, and Successors in Office, Stanley Frazer, as Personnel Director, Personnel Dept., State of Alabama, His Agents, Assigns, and Successors in Office, Defendants; UNITED STATES of America by John N. MITCHELL, Attorney General, Plaintiff, v. John S. FRAZER, as Director, Alabama Personnel Department, Et Al., DefendantsDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama 1970-01-26MILLS Et Al. v. ELECTRIC AUTO-LITE CO. Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1967-05-08FLEISCHMANN DISTILLING CORP. Et Al. v. MAIER BREWING CO. Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1962-06-25VAUGHAN v. ATKINSON Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1953-03-27Bertha E. Maurer, vs. International Re-Insurance Corporation, a Corporation Organized and Existing Under the Laws of the State of Delaware. Appeal of William Prickett From the Order of the Chancellor Dated January 27, 1953, on the Petition of William Prickett for an Allowance Out of the Defendant’s Estate. AND Cross-Appeal of Arthur G. Logan and William D. Denney, Receivers of International Re-Insurance Corporation, From a Part of the Order of the Chancellor of the State of Delaware Dated January 27, 1953, on the Petition of William Prickett for an Allowance Out of the Receivership EstateSupreme Court of Delaware 1951-02-239 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 403, 1 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9622 Rolax v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.Fourth Circuit 1940-01-29Federal Communications Commission v. Pottsville Broadcasting Co.Supreme Court of the United States

What it rests on

1885-01-05CENTRAL RAILROAD & BANKING COMPANY OF GEORGIA v. PETTUS & OthersSupreme Court of the United States 1882-05-18Trustees v. GreenoughSupreme Court of the United States

12 point outside the corpus. Read from the text, but no judgment held here answers to them. They are counted rather than hidden: this corpus is a slice, not the law.

Departed from

No judgment recorded a departure from this one.

Departure is not detected yet, and the gap is deliberate. Searching for the words the Court might use was measured on 1,019 judgments: "depart from" appears 100 times and most often means departing from the facts found by a domestic court; "overruled" appears 44 times, usually about a domestic judgment; "abandon" appears 123 times, most often as abandoned firearms. Tightened to require the Court itself as the subject, precision was still around 40%, the rest being a dissenting judge complaining, or a national supreme court departing from its own case-law. Telling a lawyer an authority is dead when it is alive is worse than saying nothing, so nothing is what this says until each candidate can be judged properly.

not characterised

Most citations carry no word at all. The Court does not always say what it is doing when it cites one of its own judgments, and where it stayed silent nothing is inferred here.