Diamond Match Company v. Village of Ontonagon’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 7 district · 51 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 121 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[S]uch goods do not cease to be part of the general mass of property in the State . . . until they have been shipped, or entered with a common carrier for transportation to another State, or have been started upon such transportation in a continuous route or journey. . . . (emphasis added).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Champlain Realty Co. v. Town of Brattleboro · Rees-Scott Co. v. City of New Orleans

2. ““Where the subject is national in its character, and. admits and requires uniformity of regulation, affecting alike all the states, such as transportation between the states, including the importation of goods from one state into nnolher. Congress can alone act upon it and provide the needed regulations. The absence of any law of Congress on the subject is equivalent to its declaration that commerce in that matter shall be free. Thus the absence of regulations as to interstate commerce with reference to any particular subject is taken as a declaration that the importation of that article into the states shall be unrestricted. It is only after the importation is completed, and the property imported has mingled with and become a part of the general property of the state, that its regulations can act upon it, except so far as may be necessary to insure safety in the disposition of the import until thus mingled.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Landon v. Public Utilities Commission

3. “When the products . . . are collected and brought in . . . to a . . . station serving as an entrepôt *Page 441 . . . such products are not yet exports, nor are they in process of exportation, nor is exportation begun until they are committed to the common carrier for transportation out of the State to the State of their destination, or have started on their ultimate passage to that State. Until then it is reasonable to regard them as not only within the State of their origin, but as a part of the general mass of property of that State, . . .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 350 So. 2d 438 - American Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. Boswell