Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Cade’s Empirical Analysis
233 U.S. 642 · 1914
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 8 district · 148 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 249 later decisions (32 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2011 · most notably McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher (1961), New York Central Railroad Company v. Sarah White (1917)
21 federal appellate · 8 district · 148 state decisions — followed in 30 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 Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co. · Edwin Hale v. William Henkel · Smyth v. Ames · Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad
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 249 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If the classification is otherwise -reasonable, the mere fact that attorney’s fees are allowed to successful plaintiffs only, and not to successful defendants, does not render the statute repugnant to the ‘equal protection’ clause. This is not a discrimination between different citizens or classes of citizens, since members of any and every class may either sue or be sued. Actor and reus differ in their respective attitudes towards a litigation; the former has the burden of seeking the proper jurisdiction and bringing the proper parties before it, as well as the burden of proof upon the main issues; and these differences may be made the basis of distinctive treatment respecting the allowance of an attorneys’ fee as a part of the costs.” 223 U.S. 642 , 34 S.Ct. 681 , 58 L.Ed. at page 1138.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Hereafter, any person in this state having a valid, bona fide claim against any person or corporation doing business in this state, for * * * damaged freight, * * * may present the same to such person or corporation * * * in any county where suit may be instituted for the same; and if, at the expiration of thirty days after the presentation of such claim, the same has not been paid or satisfied, he may immediately institute suit thereon in the proper court; and if he shall finally establish his claim, ⅜ ⅛ * he shall be entitled to recover the amount of such claim * * * and, in addition thereto, a reasonable amount as attorney’s fees, * ⅜ * not to exceed twenty dollars.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"If the classification is otherwise reasonable, the mere fact that attorney's fees are allowed to successful plaintiffs only, and not to successful defendants, does not render the statute repugnant to the `equal protection' clause. * * * "* * * "* * * The outlay for an attorney's fee is a necessary consequence of the litigation, and since it must fall upon one party or the other, it is reasonable to impose it upon the party whose refusal to pay a just claim renders the litigation necessary."”
4 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.