Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 103 U.S. 358 - Wolff v. New Orleans

Wolff v. New Orleans’s Empirical Analysis

103 U.S. 358 · 1880

Citation profile

149
cited by 149 later decisions
17
cited 17 times by the Supreme Court
19
states following
December 2006
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 11 district · 71 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 149 later decisions (17 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2006 · most notably Hans v. State of Louisiana (1890), United States Trust Company of New York v. New Jersey (1977)

18 federal appellate · 11 district · 71 state decisions — followed in 19 states

4001880189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Von Hoffman v. City of Quincy · Meriwether v. Garrett · United States v. New Orleans

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

  1. ““It is true that the power of taxation belongs exclusively to the legislative department, and that the legislature may at any time restrict or revoke at its pleasure any of the powers of a municipal corporation, including, among others, that of taxation, subject, however, to this qualification, which attends all State legislation, that its action in that respect shall not conflict with the prohibitions of the Constitution of the United States, and, among other things, shall not operate directly upon contracts of the corporation, so as to impair their obligation by abrogating or lessening the means of their enforcement. Legislation producing this latter result, not indirectly as a consequence of legitimate measures taken, as will sometimes happen, but directly by operating upon those means, is prohibited by the Constitution, and must be disregarded—treated as if never enacted —by all courts recognizing the Constitution as the paramount law of the land. This doctrine has been repeatedly asserted by this court when attempts have been made to limit the power of taxation of a municipal body, upon the faith of which contracts have been made, and by means of which alone they could be performed. So long as the corporation continues in existence, the court has said that the control of the legislature over the power of taxation delegated to it is restrained to cases where such control does not impair the obligation of contracts made upon a pledge, expressly or impliedly given, that the”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““When the bonds in question were issued there were laws in force which authorized and required the collection of taxes sufficient in amount to meet the interest, as it accrued from time to time, upon the entire debt. But for the act of the 14th of February, 1863, there would be no difficulty in enforcing them. The amount permitted to be collected by that act will be insufficient; and it is not certain that anything will be yielded applicable to that object. To the extent of the deficiency the obligation of the contract will be impaired, and if there be nothing applicable, it may be regarded as annulled. A right without a remedy is as if it were not. For every beneficial purpose it may be said not to exist. . . . “The laws requiring taxes to the requisite amount to be collected, in force when the bonds were issued, are still in force for all the purposes of this case. The act of 1863 is, so far as it affects these bonds, a nullity.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “that the prohibition ^of the Constitution against the passage of laws impairing the obligation of contracts applies to the contracts of States, and to those of its agents under its authority, as well as to contracts between individuals.”
    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.