Ohio Oil Co. v. Conway’s Empirical Analysis
281 U.S. 146 · 1930
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 12 district · 172 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 317 later decisions (70 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2009 · most notably Home Building & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell (1934), Nordlinger v. Hahn (1992)
29 federal appellate · 12 district · 172 state decisions — followed in 35 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 Royster Guano Co v. Commonwealth of Virginia · Magoun v. Illinois Trust & Savings Bank · Louisville Gas & Electric Co. v. Coleman · Metropolis Theatre Co. v. City of Chicago · Bell's Gap Railroad v. Pennsylvania
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 317 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The States have a very wide discretion in the laying of their taxes. When dealing with their proper domestic concerns, and not trenching upon the prerogatives of the National Government or violating the guaranties of the Federal Constitution, the States have the attribute of sovereign powers in devising their fiscal systems to ensure revenue and foster their local interest. Of course, the States, in the exercise of their taxing power, are subject to the requirements of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. But that clause imposes no iron rule of equality, prohibiting the flexibility and variety that are appropriate to reasonable schemes of state taxation. The State may impose different specific taxes upon different trades and professions and may vary the rate of excise upon various products. It is not required to resort to close distinctions or to maintain a precise, scientific uniformity with reference to composition, use or value. . . . . 'To hold otherwise would be to subject the essential taxing power of the State to an intolerable supervision, hostile to the basic principles of our government and wholly beyond the protection which the general clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to assure.' "”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“id., namely, whether that classification rests upon some ground of difference having a fair and substantial relation to the object of the legislation, so that all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike. See Ohio Oil Co. v. Conway, 281 U.S. 146 , 50 S.Ct. 310 , 74 L.Ed. 775 (1930). Stated another way”
5 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.