Texas Ry Co v. Interstate Commerce Commission’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

97 federal appellate · 44 district · 71 state decisions

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

1. ““ * * * That, in passing upon questions arising under the act, the tribunal appointed to enforce its provisions, whether the Commission or the courts, is empowered to consider fully all the circumstances and conditions that reasonably apply to the situation, and that, in the exercise of its jurisdiction, the tribunal may and should consider the legitimate interests as well of the carrying companies as of the traders and shippers, and in considering whether any particular locality is subjected to an undue preference or disadvantage the welfare of the communities occupying the localities where the goods are delivered is to be considered as well as that of the communities which are in the locality of the place of shipment; that among the circumstances and conditions to be considered, as well in the case of traffic originating in foreign ports as in the case of traffic originating within the limits of the United States, competition that affects rates should be considered, and, in deciding whether rates and charges made at a low rate to secure foreign freights which would otherwise go by other competitive routes are or are not undue and unjust, the fair interests of the carrier companies and the welfare of the community which is to receive and consume the commodities are to be considered.””

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Interstate Commerce Commission v. Alabama Midland Railway Co. · Interstate Commerce Commission v. Alabama Midland Ry. Co.

2. ““It would be difficult to use language more unmistably signifying that Congress had in view the whole field of commerce (excepting commerce wholly within a state), as well that between the states and territories as that going to or coming from foreign countries.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Geddes · United States v. Colorado & N. W. R. Co.

3. ““Sec. 2. Tliat if any common carrier subject to the provisions of this act shall, directly or indirectly, by any special rate, rebate, drawback, or other device, charge, demand, collect, or receive from any person or persons a greater or less compensation for any service rendered, or to be rendered, in the transportation of passengers or property, subject to the provisions of this act, than it charges, demands, collects or receives from any other person or persons for doing for him or them a like and contemporaneous service in the transportation of a like kind of traffic under substantially similar circumstances and conditions, such common carrier shall be deemed guilty ol unjust discrimination,'which is hereby prohibited and declared to be unlawful. “Sec. 3. That it shall be unlawful for any common carrier subject to the provisions of this act to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, company, firm, corporation, or locality, or any particular description of traffic, in any respect whatsoever, or to subject any particular person, company, firm, corporation, or locality, or any particular description of traffic, to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage in any respect whatsoever. “Every common carrier subject to the provisions of this act shall, according to their respective powers, afford all reasonable, proper, and equal facilities for the interchange of traffic between their respective lines, and the receiving, ”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Armour Packing Co. v. United States · Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. United States