Geddes Et Al. v. Anaconda Copper Mining Company Et Al.

1921-01-24 · Supreme Court of the United States · United States

read the judgment

1What it rests on

4Relied 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.

19671 judgments13 years silent19802 judgments6 years silent19861 judgments

4 judgments have relied on it, across 1967–1986

first 1967 · last 1986 · busiest 1980 (2 judgments)

1986-01-06Hanson Trust Plc, Hscm Industries Inc., Hanson Holdings Netherlands B v. and Hmac Investments Inc. v. Ml Scm Acquisition Inc., Ml L.B.O. Holdings Inc., Merrill Lynch Capitol Partners, Inc., Merrill Lynch Capitol Markets, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, Scm Corporation, Paul H. Elicker, D. George Harris, Robert O. Bass, Robert P. Bauman, John T. Booth, George E. Hall, Crocker Nevin, Charles W. Parry, Thomas G. Pownall, E. Everett Smith, David W. Wallace, and Richard R. WestCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit 1980-11-17Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,603, Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,705 Treadway Companies, Inc. v. Care Corporation, Robert W. Browne, Daniel Cowin and Philip Dejourno, Care Corporation, Robert W. Browne and Philip Dejourno, Counterclaim v. Fair Lanes, Inc., Treadway Companies, Inc., Daniel Parke Lieblich, John R. McDonnell Simon Gluckman, Norman Brassler, Murray L. Cole, Samuel B. Dobrow and Bernard Mills, Counterclaim Care Corporation and Philip Dejourno, Suing Derivatively in the Right and for the Benefit of Treadway Companies, Inc., Counterclaim v. Fair Lanes, Inc., Daniel Parke Lieblich, John R. McDonnell Simon Gluckman, Norman Brassler, Murray L. Cole, Samuel B. Dobrow and Bernard Mills, Counterclaim and Treadway Companies, Inc., Nominal CounterclaimCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit 1980-11-14CROUSE-HINDS COMPANY, Plaintiff-Counterclaim-Defendant-Appellant, v. INTERNORTH, INC., and IN Holdings, Inc., Defendants-Counterclaim-Plaintiffs-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit 1967-01-23Charles E. Brundage, Individually and as Trustee for the Charles E. and Edna T. Brundage Charitable Scientific and Wild Life Conservation Foundation, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Eileen H. Carr, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellant, v. the New Jersey Zinc Company, a New Jersey Corporation, Et Al., Defendants-RespondentsSupreme Court of New Jersey

What it rests on

1919-06-02United States v. Babcock; United States v. HaydenSupreme Court of the United States

10 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.