Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 274 U.S. 387 - Ft Smith Light Traction Co v.

Ft Smith Light Traction Co v.’s Empirical Analysis

274 U.S. 387 · 1927

Citation profile

144
cited by 144 later decisions
16
cited 16 times by the Supreme Court
16
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 15 district · 55 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 144 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2018 · most notably Kadrmas v. Dickinson Public Schools (1988), Holt Civic Club v. City of Tuscaloosa (1978)

21 federal appellate · 15 district · 55 state decisions — followed in 16 states

3801927193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Hayes v. State of Missouri · Missouri v. Lewis · Missouri Pac Ry Co v. Mackey · John Mallett v. State of North Carolina · Middleton v. Texas Power & Light 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 144 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"* * * The Fourteenth Amendment does not prohibit legislation merely because it is special, or limited in its application to a particular geographical or political subdivision of the state."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “does not require the uniform application of legislation to objects that are different, where those differences may be made the rational basis of legislative discrimination.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “in form a general statute, but by reason of provisions making it applicable [only to railways with certain characteristics] it in fact applied to plaintiff in error alone.”
    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.