McHenry v. Alfore’s Empirical Analysis
168 U.S. 651 · 1898
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 7 district · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2000 · most notably Western Live Stock v. Bureau of Revenue (1938), Luria v. United States (1913)
7 federal appellate · 7 district · 46 state decisions — followed in 16 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Philadelphia & Southern Steamship Co. v. Pennsylvania · Maine v. Grand Trunk Railway Co. · State Tax on Railway Gross Receipts. Reading Railroad Company v. Pennsylvania · Fargo v. Michigan · Jewell v. Knight
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Although the act ‘here provides for taxation of the gross earnings arising from the operation of the road, the phrase means earnings which arise because of its operation. The road is in operation, and the earnings which it is thereby enabled to make are to be taxed. Property which the company owns, and which has enabled and continues to enable it to operate its road, is part of the property from which the earnings arise by reason of such operation, and is within the meaning of the act. These lands are of this description. Although they are not taxed directly, yet the same is true of- the right of way, the roadbed, the engines, cars, and water tanks, * * * without which the road could not be operated. In substance, it must be said that without the existence of all the various pieces of property just enumerated gross earnings would be quite impossible. It is also true in regard to these lands. * * * And, looking at those facts, we see that unquestionably these lands have indirectly contributed to the gross earnings derived from operating the road, and that such earnings have arisen and been made possible by reason of the lands. They have not only aided in making these gross earnings possible, but they have formed, and still do form, a material fact in the combination of circumstances cpntributing to the construction of the railroad, to its operation, and to its earnings.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““* * * When it-is said, as it is in this act, that the tax collected by this method - shall be in lieu of all other taxes whatever,it would seem that it might be claimed with great plausibility that a tax levied under: such circumstances and by such methods was not in reality a tax upon the gross earnings,-but was a tax upon the lands and other property of - the- company, and that the-method adopted of arriving at the sum which, the company should pay as taxes upon its’ property was by taking a percentage .of its. gross earnings.””
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.