Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 109 U.S. 189 - Snyder v. Marks

Snyder v. Marks’s Empirical Analysis

109 U.S. 189 · 1883

Citation profile

356
cited by 356 later decisions
45
cited 45 times by the Supreme Court
14
states following
May 2014
most recently cited

92 federal appellate · 56 district · 43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 356 later decisions (45 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2014 · most notably Enochs v. Williams Packing & Navigation Co. (1962), Phillips v. Commissioner (1931)

92 federal appellate · 56 district · 43 state decisions — followed in 14 states

82018831890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 State Railroad Tax Cases Taylor Collector et al. v. Secor et al. · Cheatham v. United States

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

  1. ““The remedy of a suit to recover back the tax after it is paid is provided by statute, and a suit to restrain its collection is forbidden. The remedy so given is exclusive, and no other remedy can be substituted for it.””
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “No suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The remedy so given is exclusive, and no other remedy can be substituted for it. Such has been the current of decisions in the Circuit Courts of the United States, and we are satisfied it is a correct view of the law. [Citations.] In Cheatham v. United States, 92 U. S. 85 , 88 [ 23 L. Ed. 561 ], and again in State Railroad Tax Cases, 92 U. S. 575 , 613 [ 23 L. Ed. 663 ], it was said by this court, that the system prescribed by the United States in regard to both customs duties and internal revenue taxes, of stringent measures, not judicial, to collect them, with appeals to specified tribunals, and suits to recover back moneys illegally exacted was a system of corrective justice intended to be complete, and enacted under the right belonging to the Government to prescribe the conditions on which it would subject itself to the judgment of the courts in the collection of its revenues.””
    4 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.