Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Wharton’s Empirical Analysis
207 U.S. 328 · 1907
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 9 district · 45 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 142 later decisions (24 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1983 · most notably Simpson v. Shepard (1913), United States of America v. American Tobacco Co. (1911)
11 federal appellate · 9 district · 45 state decisions — followed in 16 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.
Relationships
Relies on Robbins v. Taxing District of Shelby Co Tennessee · Leisy v. Hardin · Welton v. The State of Missouri · County of Mobile v. Kimball · United States v. E. C. Knight Co.
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 142 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The term ‘adequate or reasonable facilities’ is not in its nature capable of exact definition. It is a relative expression, and has to be considered as calling for such facilities as might be fairly demanded, regard being had, among other things, to the size of the place, the extent of the demand for transportation, the cost of furnishing the additional accommodations asked for, and to all other facts which would have a bearing upon the question of convenience and cost.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““That any exercise of state authority, in whatever form manifested, which directly regulates interstate commerce, is repugnant to the commerce clause ■ of the Constitution, is obvious. It hence' arises that any command of a state, whether made directly or through the instrumentality of a railroad commission, which orders, or the necessary effect of which is to order, the stopping of an interstate train at a named station or stations, if it directly regulates interstate commerce, is void. * * * When, therefore, an order made under state authority to stop an interstate train is assailed because of its repugnancy to the interstate commerce clause, the question whether such regulation is void as a direct regulation of such commerce may be tested by considering the nature of the order, the character of the interstate train to which it applies, and its necessary and direct effect upon the operation of such train. But the effect of the order as a direct regulation of interstate commerce may also be tested by considering the adequacy of the local facilities existing at the station or stations at which the interstate train has been commanded to stop.””
2 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.