Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 209 U.S. 337 - United States v. Cerecedo Hermanos y Compañia

United States v. Cerecedo Hermanos y Compañia’s Empirical Analysis

209 U.S. 337 · 1908

Citation profile

300
cited by 300 later decisions
45
cited 45 times by the Supreme Court
15
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

115 federal appellate · 40 district · 35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 300 later decisions (45 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably United States v. Anderson (1926), Zemel v. Rusk (1965)

115 federal appellate · 40 district · 35 state decisions — followed in 15 states

990190819101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 United States v. Healey · Robertson v. Downing · United States v. G. Falk & Brother

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 300 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““When the meaning of a statute is doubtful great weight should be given to the construction placed upon it by the department charged with its execution.” United States v. Hermanos y Compañia, 209 U. S. 337 , 28 Sup. Ct. 532 , 52 L. Ed. 821 .”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The re-enactment by Congress, without change, of a statute, which had previously received long-continued executive construction, is an adoption by Congress of such construction.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.