Dooley v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
183 U.S. 151 · 1901
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 20 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 125 later decisions (25 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2019 · most notably Prudential Ins Co v. Benjamin (1946), Lottery Case (1903)
9 federal appellate · 20 district · 12 state decisions
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.
Relationships
Relies on William Marbury v. James Madison · Gibbons v. Ogden · Slaughter-House Cases the Butchers' Benevolent Association of New Orleans v. The Crescent City Live · Knowlton v. Moore · Brown v. Maryland
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 125 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is not intended by this opinion to intimate that Congress may lay an export tax upon merchandise carried from one state to another. While this does not seem to be forbidden by the express words of the Constitution, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to lay such a tax without a violation of the 1st paragraph of art. 1, § 8 that “all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.” ... The question, however, is not involved in this case, and we do not desire to express an opinion upon it.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The constitutional provision that “no tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state” has been the subject of elaborate and authoritative exposition, and we need but apply the principles of construction which have been settled by previous decisions.... The prohibition relates only to exportation to foreign countries ... and is designed to give immunity from taxation to property that is in the actual course of such exportation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Limiting the Export Clause to foreign commerce] would defeat the manifest purpose of the Constitution by enabling discriminating taxes and duties to be laid against one section of the country as distinguished from another.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.