Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 281 F.1d 41 - Malley v. Walter Baker & Co.

Malley v. Walter Baker & Co.’s Empirical Analysis

281 F. 41 · 1922

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
January 1955
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1955

3 federal appellate · 1 district ·

301922193019401950decided

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 United States v. Grimaud · Maryland Casualty Co. v. United States · Noble v. Union River Logging Railroad · United States v. Birdsall · Houghton v. Payne

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

  1. ““The plaintiff is not entitled to recover more than the amount that it can show it paid as a tax on such portions of the product in question as were not sold and used as candy within the meaning of the Department’s regulation.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Candy within the meaning of the act includes ... . sweet chocolate and sweet milk chocolate, whether plain or mixed with fruit or nuts.”
    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.