Morris v. Duby’s Empirical Analysis
274 U.S. 135 · 1927
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 39 district · 81 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 218 later decisions (45 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2001 · most notably SC Hwy. Dept. v. Barnwell Bros. (1938), Sproles v. Binford (1932)
8 federal appellate · 39 district · 81 state decisions — followed in 25 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 Mugler v. State of Kansas State of Kansas Tufts · Slaughter-House Cases the Butchers' Benevolent Association of New Orleans v. The Crescent City Live · Reagan v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. · Leisy v. Hardin · John Hendrick v. State of Maryland
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 218 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. “An examination of the acts of Congress discloses no provision, express or implied, by which there is withheld from the state its ordinary police power to conserve the highways in the interest of the public and to prescribe such reasonable regulations for their use as may be wise to prevent injury and damage to' them. In the absence of national legislation especially covering the subject of interstate commerce, the state may rightly prescribe uniform regulations adapted to promote safety upon its highways and the conservation of their use, applicable alike to vehicles moving in interstate commerce and those of its own citizens. Hendrick v. Maryland, 235 U. S. 610 , 622, 35 S. Ct. 140 , 59 L. Ed. 385 , et seq.; Kane v. New Jersey, 242 U. S. 160 , 167, 37 S. Ct. 30 , 61 L. Ed. 222 .” Martine et al. v. Kozer (D. C.) 11 F.(2d) 645 ; Anthony et al. v. Kozer (D. C.) 11 F.(2d) 641 .”
7 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.