Hopkins v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
171 U.S. 578 · 1898
Citation profile
88 federal appellate · 52 district · 69 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 392 later decisions (63 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2004 · most notably Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. United States (1911), Wickard v. Filburn (1942)
88 federal appellate · 52 district · 69 state decisions — followed in 21 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 Monongahela Navigation Co. v. United States · Brown v. Maryland · Allgeyer v. State of Louisiana · Robbins v. Taxing District of Shelby Co Tennessee · Hooper v. People of State of California
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 392 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Commerce is a term of the largest import. It comprehends intercourse for •tilie purposes ;of trade in any and all .-its forms, including the transportation, purchase; sale, -and exchange of commodities between the citizens of our country and the citizens or subjects of other countries, and between the citizens of different, states'. - The power to regulate it embraces all the instruments by ■which such commerce may be cóndüéted.””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“must have a reasonable construction, or else there would scarcely be an agreement or contract among business [persons] that could not be said to have, indirectly or remotely, some bearing upon interstate commerce, and possibly to restrain it.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The contract condemned by the statute is one whose direct and immediate effect is a restraint upon that kind of trade or commerce which is interstate. * * * To treat as condemned by the act all agreements under which, as a result, the cost of conducting an interstate commercial business may be increased, would enlarge the application of the act far beyond the fair meaning of the language used. There must be some direct and immediate effect upon interstate commerce in order to come within the act””
4 later decisions 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.