Detroit Citizens' St Ry Co v. Detroit Ry’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 federal appellate · 21 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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is clear that the statute did not explicitly and directly confer the power on the municipality to grant an exclusive privilege to occupy its streets for railway purposes. It Is urged, however, that such power is to be inferred from the provision which requires the consent of tlie municipal authorities to tlie construction of a railway under such terms as they may prescribe, combined with tlie provisions of the Constitution, which, if they do not confer a power independent of the Legislature, strongly provide for and intend local government The argument is strong, and all of its strength has been presented and is appreciated, but there exist considerations of countervailing and superior strength. That such power must be given in language explicit and express, or necessarily to be implied from other powers, is now firmly fixed. There were many reasons which urged to this — reasons which flow from the nature of the municipal trust — even from Hie nature of the legislative trust, and those which, without .the clearest intention explicitly declared, insistently forbid that tlie future should be committed and bound by tlie conditions of tlie present time, and functions delegated for public purposes be paralyzed in their exercise by the existence of exclusive privileges. The rule and tlie reason for it are expressed in Minturn v. Larue, 23 How. 435 , 16 L. Ed. 574 ; Wright v. Nagle, 101 U. S. 791 , 25 L. Ed. 921 ; State v. Cincinnati Gas Light and Coke Co., 18 Ohio St. 262 ; Par”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Logansport Ry. Co. v. City of Logansport · Water, Light & Gas Co. v. City of Hutchinson

2. ““All companies or corporations formed for such purposes [the railway purposes mentioned in the act] shall have exclusive right to use and operate any railways constructed, owned or held by them: provided that no company or corporation shall he authorized to construct a railway under this act through the streets of any town or city without the consent of the municipal authorities of such town or city, and under such regulations and upon such terms and conditions as said authorities may from time to time prescribe.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Logansport Ry. Co. v. City of Logansport

3. ““Easements in the public streets for a limited time are different, and have different consequences, from those given in perpetuity. Those reserved from monopoly are different, and have different consequences, from those fixed in monopoly. Consequently those given in perpetuity and in monopoly must have for their authority explicit permission, or. if inferred from other powers, it is not enough that the authority is convenient to them, but it must he indispensable to them.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Logansport Ry. Co. v. City of Logansport