Fidelity Deposit Company of Maryland v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s Empirical Analysis
240 U.S. 319 · 1916
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 15 district · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 108 later decisions (22 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2012 · most notably James v. Dravo Contracting Co. (1937), Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell (1926)
17 federal appellate · 15 district · 42 state decisions — followed in 15 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 National Bank v. Commonwealth · Van Allen v. The Assessors · Choctaw Oklahoma Gulf Railroad Company v. John a Harrison · Baltimore Shipbuilding Dry Dock Company of Baltimore City v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore · Farmers Mechanics Savings Bank of Minneapolis v. State of Minnesota
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 108 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But mere contracts between private corporations and the United States do not necessarily render the former essential governmental agencies, and confer freedom from state control. Baltimore Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. Baltimore, 195 U. S. 375 , 49 L. Ed. 242 , 25 Sup. Ct. Rep. 50.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““That the challenged tax ‘is an exaction for the privilege of doing business,’ seems plain (Equitable Life Ass. Soc. v. Pennsylvania, 238 U. S. 143 ); and undoubtedly a state may not directly and materially hinder exercise of constitutional powers of the United States by demanding in opposition to the will of congress that a federal instrumentality pay a tax for the privilege of performing its functions. (Farmers’ Bank v. Minnesota, 232 U. S. 516 ; Choctaw & Gulf R. R. v. Harrison, 235 U. S. 292 .) But mere contracts between private corporations and the United States do not necessarily render the former essential governmental agencies and confer freedom from state control. (Baltimore Ship Building Co. v. Baltimore, 195 U. S. 375 .)” (p. 323.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“internal revenue, customs, United States government officials, United States government contracts and banks for United States deposits,”
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.