Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 242 U.S. 272 - Long Sault Development Co. v. Call

Long Sault Development Co. v. Call’s Empirical Analysis

242 U.S. 272 · 1916

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
16
cited 16 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Milk Wagon Drivers Union of Chicago Local 753 v. Meadowmoor Dairies (1941), Appleby v. City of New York (1926)

12 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

17019161920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Neal v. Delaware · Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois · Henry v. A. B. Dick Co. · Defiance Water Co. v. Defiance · New Orleans v. Benjamin

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

  1. “the title which a State holds to land under navigable waters is ... held in trust for the people of the State, in order that they may enjoy the navigation of the waters and carry on commerce over them, free from obstruction or interference by private parties; that this trust devolving upon the State in the public interest is one which cannot be relinquished by a transfer of the property; that a State can no more abdicate its trust over such property, in which the whole people are interested, so as to leave it under the control of private parties, than it can abdicate its police powers in the administration of government and the preservation of the peace; and that the trust under which such lands are held is governmental so that they cannot be alienated, except to be used for the improvement of the public use in them.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the prohibition of the Constitution against the impairing of contracts by state legislation does not reach errors committed by state courts when passing upon the validity and effect of a contract under a constitution or laws existing when it is made,”
    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.