Northern Pac Ry Co v. Solum Same’s Empirical Analysis
247 U.S. 477 · 1918
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 29 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 201 later decisions (34 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1990 · most notably Crowell v. Benson (1932), Rochester Telephone Corporation v. United States (1939)
49 federal appellate · 29 district · 24 state decisions — followed in 12 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 Simpson v. Shepard · Houston East West Texas Railway Company v. United States · Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Puritan Coal Mining Company · Texas Pacific Railway Company v. American Tie & Timber Company · Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Clark Brothers Coal Mining Company
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 201 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where a railroad company operates two lines of railroad between the same points, and the freight rate over one line is less than such rate over the other line, if other conditions are reasonably equal, it is the duty of the company to transport shipments between those points over the line which will give the shipper the benefit of the cheaper rate. To justify transporting such shipments over the other line, and thereby compel the shipper to pay the higher rate, the company must show that such line was chosen by the shipper, or that the circumstances or exigencies were such that a proper regard for the interests of the shipper precluded the use of the cheaper line.” (Italics ours.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The shipper, on the other hand, urges that the rule, which requires such preliminary determination of administrative questions by the Commission applies only to those eases ■where the question involved, is whether a particular rate is unreasonable or whether a particular practice is discriminatory. But the rule is not so limited. It applies, likewise, to any practice of the earner which gives rise to the application of a rate [citing cases].””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Jurisdiction of a suit by a shipper to recover amounts paid for shipments over an interstate route between two points, both within the state, in excess of what would have been payable under the state law if the shipments had been made over an intrastate route, may not be assumed in advance of a determination by the Interstate Commerce Commission of the administrative question as to the reasonableness of the carrier’s practice, because of the grades of the two lines, in routing west-bound shipments over the longer interstate route, and east-bound shipments over the shorter intrastate route.””
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.