Chicago Milwaukee St Paul Railway Company v. State of Iowa’s Empirical Analysis
233 U.S. 334 · 1914
Citation profile
43 federal appellate · 25 district · 54 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 185 later decisions (14 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2009 · most notably Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. State of West Virginia State of Ohio (1923), Stafford v. Wallace (1922)
43 federal appellate · 25 district · 54 state decisions — followed in 21 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 Southern Pacific Terminal Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission · Simpson v. Shepard · Slaughter-House Cases the Butchers' Benevolent Association of New Orleans v. The Crescent City Live · Allgeyer v. State of Louisiana · Coe v. Town of Errol
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 185 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Under the admitted facts, the city of Davenport became a distributing point for coal shipped by the consignor. The certainty in regard to the shipments of coal ended at Davenport. The point where the same was to be shipped beyond Davenport, if at all, was determined after the arrival of the coal at Davenport.”'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is undoubtedly true that the question whether commerce is interstate or intrastate must be determined by the essential character of the commerce, and not by mere billing or forms of contract. * * * gut fact that commodities received on interstate shipments are reshipped by the consignees, in the ears in which they are received, to other points of destination, does not necessarily establish a continuity of movement, or prevent the reshipment to a point within the state from having an independent and intrastate character.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““But the fact that commodities received on interstate shipments are reshipped by the consignees, in the cars in which they are received, to other points of destination, does not necessarily establish a continuity of movement, or prevent the reshipment to a point within the same state from having an independent and intrastate character.””
3 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.