Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 284 U.S. 511 - United States Cartridge Co. v. United States

United States Cartridge Co. v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

284 U.S. 511 · 1932

Citation profile

138
cited by 138 later decisions
14
cited 14 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
August 1987
most recently cited

51 federal appellate · 3 district · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 138 later decisions (14 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1987 · most notably Thor Power Tool Company v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1979), Real Estate - Land Title & Trust Co. v. United States (1940)

51 federal appellate · 3 district · 15 state decisions

520193219401950196019701980decided

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 Lucas v. American Code Co. · Burnet v. Sanford & Brooks Co. · Lewis v. Reynolds · Lucas v. Kansas City Structural Steel Co. · College Point Boat Corporation v. United States

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

  1. ““ ‘Obsolescence’ may arise from changes in art, shifting of business centers, loss of trade, inadequacy, supersession, prohibitory laws, and other things which, apart from physical deterioration, operate to cause plant elements or^ the plant as a whole to suffer diminution in value. Burnet v. Niagara Falls Brewing Co., 282 U.S. 648, 654 , 51 S.Ct. 262 , 75 L.Ed. 594, 597 ; V. Loewers Gambrinus Brewery Co. v. Anderson, 282 U.S. 638 , 51 S.Ct. 260 , 75 L.Ed. 588 .””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “had no assurance as to what settlements finally would be made or that it ever would receive more than the then market value of the inventories.”
    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.