Board of Trade v. Christie Grain & Stock Co.’s Empirical Analysis
198 U.S. 236 · 1905
Citation profile
136 federal appellate · 37 district · 98 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 454 later decisions (58 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co. (1984), Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co. (1911)
136 federal appellate · 37 district · 98 state decisions — followed in 26 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
reviewedChristie Grain & Stock Co. v. Board of Trade of Chicago (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Gibbons v. Ogden · Munn v. Illinois · Logan v. United States · Addyston Pipe Steel Company v. United States · Northern Securities Company v. United States
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 454 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“lose its rights by communicating the result to persons, even if many, in confidential relations to itself, under a contract not to make it public, and strangers to the trust will be restrained from getting at the knowledge by inducing a breach of trust and using knowledge obtained by such a breach.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It appears that in not less than three-quarters of the transactions in the grain pit there is no physical handing over of any grain, but that there is a settlement, either by tlie direct method, so called, or by what is known as ‘ringing up.’ 'Pile direct method consists simply in setting off contracts to buy wheat of a ceriaiu amount at a certain time against contracts to sell a like amount at the-same time, and paying the difference of price in cash, at the end of the business day. The ring settlement is reached by a comparison of books among the clerks of the members buying and selling in the pit, and picking out a series of transactions which begins and ends with dealings which can be set against each other by eliminating those between — as, if A. has sold to B. 5,000 bushels of May wheat, and B. has sold the same amount to G., and G. to D., and D. to A. Substituting D. for B. by novation, A.’s sale can be set against his purchase, on simply paying the difference in price. The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit took the defendant’s view of- these facts and ordered the bill to be dismissed. 125 Fed. 161 , 61 C. C. A. 11 . The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit declined to follow this decision and granted an injunction as prayed. 130 Fed. 507 , 61 C. C. A. 669 , 00 L. R. A. 50 . Thereupon writs of certiorari were granted by this court and both cases are here. “As has appeared, the plaintiffs Chamber of Commerce is, in the first place, a great mar”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cleage v. Laidley · Haven v. James““A means by which collectors and exporters of grain or other products, and manufacturers who make contracts in advance for the .sale of their goods, secure themselves against the fluctuations of the market by counter contracts for the purchase or sale, as the case .may be, of an equal quantity of the product, or of the material of manufacture.””
3 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.