Hodgson & Thompson v. Bowerbank
U.S.
Citation analytics
How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
★Highly CitedTop 4% most-cited · cited by 52 decisions
52
Citing decisions
6+
Courts citing
Citations by decade
1
2
1
2
1
5
1
7
7
10
5
4
6
1860s1870s1880s1890s1920s1940s1960s1970s1980s1990s2000s2010s2020s
Courts citing this case
Most recently cited by10
- 2026Robinson E.D. Mich.
- 2026James Aren Duckett v. State of Florida Fla.
- 2025Chenco Engineering & Consulting GMBH v. Do-Fluoride New Materials Co. LTD D. Idaho
- 2025Lopez v. Vega D.N.M.
- 2023Demaree v. Castro S.D.N.Y.
- 2020Env Texas Citizen Lobby, Inc. v. ExxonMobil 5th Cir.
- 2019BARRETT v. TRI-COAST PHARMACY, INC. D.N.J.
- 2016Flextronics International USA, Inc. v. Sparkling Drink Systems Innovation Center Ltd. N.D. Ill.
- 2014Matao Yokeno v. Sawako Sekiguchi 9th Cir.
- 2012H.K. Huilin International Trade Co. v. Kevin Multiline Polymer Inc. E.D.N.Y.
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Opinion
HODGSON AND THOMPSON v. BOWERBANK AND OTHERS.
Attorneys
- Martin contended,
- C. Lee, contra.
majority
Turn to the article of'the constitution of the United States, for the statute cannot extend the jurisdiction beyond the limits of the constitution.
(The words of the constitution were found to be “ between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens, or subjects.”)
The court said the objection was fatal.
The record was afterwards amended by consent.