Williams v. City of Talladega’s Empirical Analysis
226 U.S. 404 · 1912
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 21 district · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 137 later decisions (40 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1977 · most notably James v. Dravo Contracting Co. (1937), Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell (1926)
9 federal appellate · 21 district · 47 state decisions — followed in 13 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
reviewedWilliams v. City of Talladega
Relationships
Relies on M'Culloch v. State of Maryland · Osborn v. President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States · Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge · Leloup v. Port of Mobile · Pensacola Telegraph Company v. Western Union Telegraph Company
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 137 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We have * * * an ordinance which taxes, without exemption, the privilege of carrying on a business a part of which is that of a governmental agency, constituted under a law of the United States and engaged in an essential part of the' public business — communication between the officers and departments of the federal government. The ordinance, making no exception of this class of business, necessarily includes its transaction within the privilege tax levied. This part of the license exacted necessarily affects the whole, and makes the tax unconstitutional and void.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““With this view we agree, and we are not satisfied that the tax is such as to impose a burden upon interstate commerce, and therefore make it subject to attack as a denial of Federal rights.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The reasonableness of the ordinance, unless some federal right set up and claimed is violated, is a matter for the state to determine.””
1 later decision 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.