Simpson v. Shepard’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

245 federal appellate · 243 district · 494 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 1,780 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The ascertainment of that value is not controlled by artificial rules. It is not a matter of formulas, but there must be a reasonable judgment having its basis in a proper consideration of all relevant facts.”

   41 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. North Dakota ex rel. McCue · Georgia Railway & Power Co. v. Railroad Commission

2. ““The authority of Congress extends to every part of interstate commerce * * * and the full control by Congress of the subjects committed to its regulation is not to be denied or thwarted by the commingling of interstate and intrastate operations. This is not to say that the Nation may deal with the internal concerns of the State, as such, but that the execution by Congress of its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce is not limited by the fact that intrastate transactions may have become so interwoven therewith that the effective government of the former incidentally controls the latter. This conclusion necessarily results from the supremacy of the national power within its appointed sphere.””

   17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Hill · Railroad Commission v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad

3. ““But within these limitations there necessarily remains to the states, until Congress acts, a wide rang-e tor the permissible exercise of power appropriate to their territorial jurisdiction, although interstate commerce may be affected. It extends to those matters oí a local nature as to which it is impossible to derive from the constitutional grant an intention that they should go uncontrolled pending federal intervention. * * * Where the subject is peculiarly one of local concern, and from its nature belongs to the class with which the state appropriately deals in making reasonable provision for local needs, it cannot be regarded as left to the unrestrained will of individuals because Congress has not acted, although it may have such a relation to interstate commerce as to be within the reach of the federal power.””

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Oregon-Washington Railroad & Navigation Co. v. Washington · Manufacturers' Light & Heat Co. v. Ott