State v. Central Lumber Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1909
Citation profile
1 district · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently November 2020 · most notably Central Lumber Company v. State of South Dakota (1912), Wholesale Tobacco Dealers Bureau of Southern California, Inc. v. National Candy & Tobacco Co. (1938)
1 district · 31 state decisions — followed in 14 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 · Edwin Hale v. William Henkel · Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward · Paul v. Virginia · Hammond Packing Company v. State of Arkansas
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Many attempts have been made to define the term “police power” as applied to legislation. Justice Shaw, in the case of Com. v. Alger, (Mass.) 7 Cush. 53 , said: “It is much easier to perceive and realize the existence and source of this power than to mark its boundaries, or prescribe limits to its exercise.” However, in the same case this great jurist gave what is perhaps the best definition ever attempted, defining it as: “The power vested in the Legislature by the Constitution to make, ordain, and establish all manner of wholesome and reasonable laws, statutes, and ordinances, either with penalties or without, not repugnant to the Constitution, as they shall judge to be for the good and welfare of the commonwealth and of the subjects of the same.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.