Armour Company v. State of North Dakota’s Empirical Analysis
240 U.S. 510 · 1916
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 10 district · 79 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 178 later decisions (41 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1991 · most notably Village of Euclid Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co (1926), Nebbia v. People of State of New York (1934)
9 federal appellate · 10 district · 79 state decisions — followed in 24 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 Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis Co. · Central Lumber Company v. State of South Dakota · Carroll v. Greenwich Insurance
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 178 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The court, by these remarks, expressed the test of a judicial review of legislation enacted in the exercise of the police power, and in view of very recent decisions it is hardly necessary to enlarge upon it. We said but a few days ago that if a belief of evils is not arbitrary, we cannot measure their extent against the estimate of the legislature, and there is no impeachment of such estimate in differences of opinion, however strongly sustained. And by evils, it was said, there was not necessarily meant some definite injury, but obstacles to a greater public welfare. Nor do the courts have to be sure of the precise reasons for the legislation, or certainly know them, or be convinced of the wisdom or adequacy of the laws. East v. Van Deman & L. Co.; Tanner v. Little, 240 U. S. 342 , 60 L. Ed. 691 , 36 S. Ct. 379 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The expert who drafted the law, the legislature who passed it, and the governor who approved it, all thought necessity existed for such a measure. If we did not agree with all those, we might well hesitate to say that there was absolutely no doubt upon the question, but in fact a majority of this court believes the law not only reasonable, but necessary, and this belief is founded upon the evidence in this case and upon facts of which this court can take judicial cognizance.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““This may involve a change of packing by the company and the cost of that change, but this is a sacrifice the law can require to protect from the deception of the old method.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Polk Co. v. Glover
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.