Rushton v. Schram’s Empirical Analysis
143 F.2d 554 · 1944
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2012
8 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 194
Relies on Home Building & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell · Welch v. Henry · Campbell v. Holt · Anderson Nat Bank v. Luckett · Miller 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In the light of that fresh authority, we do not say that if invoked for prospective application, and in a manner consistent with the federal statutes, the Michigan statute would conflict with the national banking laws and constitute an unlawful interference with the liquidation of a national bank. Discussion of that problem is deemed inappropriate in view of our conclusion that the Act under consideration carries no retroactive effect in the present situation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Roth v. Delano
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.