Heim v. McCall’s Empirical Analysis
239 U.S. 175 · 1915
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 13 district · 111 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 259 later decisions (69 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2014 · most notably Will v. Michigan Department of State Police (1989), Hines v. Davidowitz (1941)
17 federal appellate · 13 district · 111 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 Yick Wo v. Hopkins · M'Culloch v. State of Maryland · Bram v. United States · Hurtado v. People of the State of California · Barbier v. Connolly
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 259 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`prescribe the conditions upon which it will permit public work to be done on its behalf, or on behalf of its municipalities.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“"§ 14. Preference in employment of persons upon public works. In the construction of public works by the state or a municipality, or by persons contracting with the state or such municipality, only citizens of the United States shall be employed; and in all cases where laborers are employed on any such public works, preference shall be given citizens of the state of New York. In each contract for the construction of public works a provision shall be inserted, to the effect that, if the provisions of this section are not complied with, the contract shall be void * * *". (Emphasis added).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“, in that there was an adequate basis for such a distinction and classification. The Crane case also held that the enforcement of said law did not deprive plaintiffs and his employees of liberty and property without due process of law. The majority today holds that the Crane and Heim cases were declared to have been”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.