Milwaukee Electric Railway Light Company v. Railroad Commission of Wisconsin’s Empirical Analysis
238 U.S. 174 · 1915
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 22 district · 61 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 122 later decisions (18 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1938 · most notably Silas Mason Co. v. Tax Commission of Washington (1937), Phelps v. Board of Education (1937)
9 federal appellate · 22 district · 61 state decisions — followed in 25 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 Home Telephone Telegraph Company v. City of Los Angeles · Detroit v. Detroit Citizens' Street Railway Co. · City of Cleveland v. Cleveland City Railway Co. · Freeport Water Company v. City of Freeport · Vicksburg v. Vicksburg Waterworks Co.
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 122 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * It has been uniformly held in this court that the renunciation of a sovereign right of this character must he evidenced by terms so clear and unequivocal as to permit of no doubt as to their proper construction.””
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The burden of plaintiff’s complaint [the plaintiff stood in the place of the city] is that the raise in ear fares ‘impairs the obligation of the contract between the said city of New Orleans, its citizens, inhabitants, and people, and especially petitioners, on the one part, and the said New Orleans Railway & Light Company and underlying companies on the other part, which is a contravention of article 166 of the Constitution of the state of Louisiana and of section 10, art. 1, of the Constitution of the United States.’ The only contracts referred to in the petition are those entered into between the city and various railway companies, to which plaintiffs were not parties, and which were made under express legislative authority, and under the police power of the state and city, and contracts granting privileges are always within and under the control of the state to change, modify, or revoke. These contracts are essentially not made with individual citizens.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““On hearing in the court of first instance, it was held that there was no contract made by the passage and acceptance of the ordinance which we have quoted, and the complaint was * * * dismissed. Upon appeal to the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, that judgment was affirmed. * * * In the view we take of the case it is unnecessary to pass upon the question whether the ordinance had the effect to make a contract binding between the city and the company until subsequent legislative action by the state.””
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.