Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 163 F.1d 141 - In re Rates

In re Rates’s Empirical Analysis

163 F. 141 · 1908

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
January 1914
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Smyth v. Ames · Ex Parte Lennon · Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. Tompkins · Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. Minnesota · Pokegama Sugar-Pine Lumber Co. v. Klamath River Lumber & Improvement 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Other standards are suggested, but the proofs indicate that none of them is as satisfactory or accurate as is the difference in cost in its relation to the revenue.””
    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.