Arizona Grocery Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.’s Empirical Analysis
284 U.S. 370 · 1932
Citation profile
367 federal appellate · 28 district · 137 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 879 later decisions (70 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2025 · most notably Consolo v. Federal Maritime Commission (1966), Yakus v. United States (1944)
367 federal appellate · 28 district · 137 state decisions — followed in 34 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedAtchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Arizona Grocery Co. (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Texas Pacific Railway Company v. Abilene Cotton Oil Company · Simpson v. Shepard · Prentis v. Atlantic Coast Line Co. · Reagan v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. · Louisville Nashville Railroad Company v. G a Maxwell
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 879 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[u]nder [the Act] the shipper was bound to pay the legal rate; but if he could show that it was unreasonable he might recover reparation.”
22 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“■ “This case turns upon the power of the Interstate Commerce Commission to award reparations with respect to shipments which moved under rates approved or prescribed by it. * * * “Where the Commission has upon complaint, and after hearing, declared what is the maximum reasonable rate to be charged by a carrier, it may not at a later time, and upon the same or additional evidence as to the fact situation existing when its previous order was promulgated, by declaring its own finding as to reasonableness erroneous, subject a carrier which conformed thereto to the payment of reparation measured by what the Commission now holds it should have decided in the earlier proceeding to be a reasonable rate.” (Italics our own.)”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“This case turns upon the power of the Interstate Commerce Commission to award reparations with respect to shipments which moved under rates approved or prescribed by it.”
2 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.