Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 247 U.S. 165 - William Peck Co v. Lowe

William Peck Co v. Lowe’s Empirical Analysis

247 U.S. 165 · 1918

Citation profile

246
cited by 246 later decisions
64
cited 64 times by the Supreme Court
24
states following
December 1998
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 14 district · 86 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 246 later decisions (64 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1998 · most notably Eisner v. Macomber (1920), Northwestern States Portland Cement Co. v. Minnesota (1959)

20 federal appellate · 14 district · 86 state decisions — followed in 24 states

970191819201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad · Brown v. Maryland · Coe v. Town of Errol · Aaron Cooley v. The Board of Wardens of the Port of Philadelphia to the Use of the Society for the Relief of Distressed Pilots Their Widows and Children Same · Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.

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

  1. ““The true construction of the constitutional provision is that no burden by way of tax or duty can be cast upon the exportation of articles, and does not mean that articles exported are relieved from the prior ordinary burdens of taxation which rest upon all property similarly situated.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is not laid on income from exportation ... in a discriminative way, but just ■- as it is laid on other income. . . . There is no discrimination. At most, exportation is affected only indirectly and remotely. The tax is levied . . .. after the recipient of the income is free to use it as he chooses. Thus what is taxed — the net income — is as far removed from exportation as are articles intended for export before the exportation begins.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “in violation of Paragraph 5 of Section 9 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States, which provides that ‘ no tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any State ’”
    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.