Burdick v. Dillon’s Empirical Analysis
144 F. 737 · 1906
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2010 · most notably Hertz Corp. v. Friend (2010), Kelly v. United States Steel Corp. (1960)
17 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
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 Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Soderberg · United States v. Mooney · Marvel v. Merritt · 1 E.H. Smith 495 - Armstrong v. Lake Champlain Granite Co. · In re Marine Machine & Conveyor Co.
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is the appellant’s contention that the principal place of business was at the place where the quarries and mills were located, and where the working operations were conducted, rather than at the Boston office, where supreme direction and control were exercised and the hulk of the sales was negotiated.” Burdick v. Dillon, 144 Fed. 737 , 738, 75 C. C. A. 603 , 604.”
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.