Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 153 U.S. 155 - Wharton v. Wise

Wharton v. Wise’s Empirical Analysis

153 U.S. 155 · 1894

Citation profile

75
cited by 75 later decisions
24
cited 24 times by the Supreme Court
13
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 11 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 75 later decisions (24 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2014 · most notably Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Cottrell (1976), Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch Co. (1938)

4 federal appellate · 11 district · 29 state decisions — followed in 13 states

1201894190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Green v. Biddle · State of Virginia v. State of Tennessee

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

  1. “Looking at the clause in which the terms 'compact' or 'agreement' appear, it is evident that the prohibition is directed to the formation of any combination tending to the increase of political power in the states, which may encroach upon or interfere with the just supremacy of the United States.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “looking at the object evidently intended by the prohibition of the articles of confederation, we are clear they were not directed against agreements of the character expressed by the compact under consideration. Its execution could in no respect encroach upon or weaken the general authority of congress under those articles. Various compacts were entered into between Pennsylvania and New Jersey and between Pennsylvania and Virginia, during the confederation, in reference to boundaries between them, and to rights of fishery in their waters, and to titles to land in their respective states, without the consent of congress, which indicated that such consent was not deemed essential to their validity.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The terms 'agreement' or 'compact' taken by themselves, are sufficiently comprehensive to embrace all forms of stipulation, written or verbal, and relating to all kinds of subjects; to those to which the United States can have no possible objection or have any interest in interfering with, as well as to those which may tend to increase and build up the political influence of the contracting states, so as to encroach upon or impair the supremacy of the United States, or interfere with their rightful management of particular subjects placed under their entire control.”
    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.