Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 258 U.S. 466 - Texas Co. v. Brown

Texas Co. v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

258 U.S. 466 · 1922

Citation profile

216
cited by 216 later decisions
39
cited 39 times by the Supreme Court
29
states following
October 2005
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 29 district · 78 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 216 later decisions (39 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2005 · most notably Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan (1935), Douglas v. City of Jeannette (1943)

30 federal appellate · 29 district · 78 state decisions — followed in 29 states

700192219301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Gibbons v. Ogden · Royster Guano Co v. Commonwealth of Virginia · Duplex Printing Press Co. v. Deering · Connolly v. Union Sewer Pipe Co. · Gulf Ry Co v. Ellis

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

  1. ““ In this case the amended complaint alleges that the oils were shipped into Washington from California. They are brought there for sale. This right of sale as to such importations is protected to the importer by the Federal Constitution, certainly while the same are in the original receptacles or containers in which they are brought into the State.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “. . . We have here a combined inspection and revenue law applicable to petroleum products, not materially differing in main features (aside from the revenue derived from the fees) from those adopted by other States . . . That it combines regulation with revenue raising is not a valid objection from the standpoint of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““ ‘Although passed after the decree below, this Act must be given effect in deciding the appeal, since the case involves only relief by injunction, and this operates wholly in futuro. ’ ’ ’”
    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.