Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 241 U.S. 79 - McFarland v. American Sugar Refining Co.

McFarland v. American Sugar Refining Co.’s Empirical Analysis

241 U.S. 79 · 1916

Citation profile

380
cited by 380 later decisions
70
cited 70 times by the Supreme Court
28
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

76 federal appellate · 35 district · 122 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 380 later decisions (70 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2016 · most notably Patterson v. New York (1977), Leary v. United States (1969)

76 federal appellate · 35 district · 122 state decisions — followed in 28 states

76019161920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedAmerican Sugar Refining Co. v. McFarland

Relationships

Relies on Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Mobile Jackson Kansas City Railroad Company v. J a Turnipseed · American Sugar Refining Co. v. McFarland

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 380 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “'[I]t is not within the province of a legislature to declare an individual guilty or presumptively guilty of a crime.'”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It is ‘essential that there shall be some rational connection between tbe faet proved and tbe ultimate fact presumed, and that tbe inference of one fact from proof of another shall not be so unreasonable as to be a purely arbitrary mandate.’ ””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “we suppose that no one would contend that the plaintiff was given the equal protection of the laws.”
    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.