City of Knoxville v. Knoxville Water Co.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

57 federal appellate · 116 district · 191 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 582 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A water plant, with all its additions, begins to depreciate in value from the moment of its use. Before coming to the question of profit at all the company is entitled to earn a sufficient sum annually to provide not only for current repairs but for making good the depreciation and replacing the parts of the property when they come to the end of their life. The company is not bound to see its property gradually waste, without making provision out of earnings for its replacement. It is entitled to see that from earnings the value of the property invested is kept unimpaired, so that at the end of any given term of years, the original investment remains as it was at the beginning. It is not only the right of the company to make such a provision, but it is its duty to its bond and stockholders, and, in the case of a public service corporation at least, its plain duty to the public. If a different course were pursued the only method of providing for replacement of property which has ceased to be useful would be the investment of new capital and the issue of new bonds or stocks. This course would lead to a constantly increasing variance between present value and bond and stock capitalization — a tendency which would inevitably lead to disaster either to the stockholders or to the public, or both.””

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Board of Public Utility Commissioners v. New York Telephone Co. · Idaho Power Co. v. Commissioner

2. ““ * * * The purpose of this suit is to arrest the operation of a law on the ground that it is void and of no effect. It happens that in this particular case it is not an act of the legislature that is attacked, but an ordinance of a municipality. Nevertheless the function of ratemaking is purely legislative in its character, and this is true, whether it is exercised directly by the legislature itself or by some subordinate or administrative body, to whom the power of fixing rates in detail has been delegated. The completed act derives its authority from the legislature and must be regarded as an exercise of the legislative power. Prentis v. Southern R. Co., 211 U.S. 210 , 29 S.Ct. 67 [ 53 L.Ed. 150 ]; Honolulu Rapid Transit & Land Co. v. Hawaii, 211 U.S. 282 , 29 S.Ct. 55 , 53 L.Ed. 186 . * * * ””

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Red C. Oil Mfg. Co. v. Board of Agriculture · Spring Valley Water Co. v. City of San Francisco

3. “and that State or community which seeks to invade it will soon discover the error in the disaster which follows.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Block v. Hirsh · Railroad Commission v. Central of Georgia Ry. Co.