Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 234 U.S. 342 - Houston East West Texas Railway Company v. United States

Houston East West Texas Railway Company v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

234 U.S. 342 · 1914

Citation profile

1,109
cited by 1,109 later decisions
233
cited 233 times by the Supreme Court
27
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

302 federal appellate · 72 district · 117 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,109 later decisions (233 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board (1938), Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala. (1957)

302 federal appellate · 72 district · 117 state decisions — followed in 27 states

2520191419201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Gibbons v. Ogden · Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad · Simpson v. Shepard · Brown v. Maryland

Cited together with National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. · Wickard v. Filburn · Simpson v. Shepard · United States v. Darby · Southern Railway Company v. United States

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 1,109 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “That it shall be unlawful for any common carrier subject to the provisions of this act to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, company, firm, corporation or locality, or any particular description of traffic, in any respect whatsoever, or to subject any particular person, company, firm, corporation, or locality, or any particular description of traffic, to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage in any respect whatsoever.”
    31 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.