Adams v. Tanner’s Empirical Analysis
244 U.S. 590 · 1917
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 48 district · 140 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 358 later decisions (55 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2015 · most notably Griswold v. State of Connecticut (1965), Meyer v. State of Nebraska (1923)
29 federal appellate · 48 district · 140 state decisions — followed in 30 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 William Truax v. Mike Raich · Allgeyer v. State of Louisiana · Holden v. Hardy · Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis Co. · McCray v. United States
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 358 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. - “ Because abuses may, and probably do, grow up in connection with this business, is adequate reason for hedging it about by - proper regulations. But this is not enough to justify destruction • of. one’s right to follow a distinctly useful calling in an upright way. Certainly there is no profession, possibly no business, which does not offer peculiar opportunities for reprehensible practices; and as to every one of them, no doubt, .some can be found quite ready earnestly to maintain that its suppression would be in the public interest. Skillfully directed agitation might also bring about apparent .condemnation of any one of them by the public. Happily for all, the fundamental guaranties of the Constitution cannot be freely submerged if .and whenever some ostensible justification is advanced and the police power invoked.””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"1. Charging a fee and failing to make any effort to find work for the applicant. "2. Sending applicants where no work exists. "3. Sending applicants to distant points where no work or where unsatisfactory work exists, but whence the applicant will not return on account of the expense involved. "4. Collusion between the agent and employer, whereby the applicant is given a few days' work and then discharged to make way for new workmen, the agent and employer dividing the fee. "5. Charging exorbitant fees, or giving jobs to such applicants as contribute extra fees, presents etc. "6. Inducing workers, particularly girls, who have been placed, to leave, pay another fee, and get a `better job.' "`Other evils charged against employment agents are the congregating of persons for gambling or other evil practices, collusion with keepers of immoral houses, and the sending of women applicants to houses of prostitution; sometimes employment offices are maintained in saloons, with the resulting evils.'"”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Ex facto jus oritur [the law arises out of the fact]. That ancient rule must prevail in order that we may have a system of living law.”
2 later decisions 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.